Pei, Thanks for reading. Some comments attached. I don't know when I will have time to work on the next version. My estimate is this weekend.
-Abram On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 5:32 PM, Pei Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Abram, > > Some comments are added into your writing after my first reading. It > seems I need to read it again. > > Pei > > On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 7:26 PM, Abram Demski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Wow! I did not mean to stir up such an argument between you two!! >> >> Pei, >> >> What if instead of using "node probability", the knowledge that "wrote >> an AGI book" is rare was inserted as a low frequency (high confidence) >> truth value on "human" => "wrote an AGI book"? Could NARS use that to >> do what Ben wants? More specifically, could it do so with only the >> knowledge: >> >> Ben is agi-author <high, high> >> guy is agi-author <high, high> >> Ben is human <high, high> >> guy is human <high, high> >> human is agi-author <low, high> >> >> If this was literally all NARS knew, what difference would >> adding/removing the last item make to the system's opinion of "guy is >> Ben"? >> >> To answer your earlier question, I am still ignoring confidence. It >> could always be calculated from the frequencies, of course. But, that >> does not justify using them in the calculations the way you do. >> Perhaps once I figure out the exact formulas for everything, I will >> see if they match up to a particular value of the parameter k. Or, >> perhaps, a value of k that moves according to the specific situation. >> Hmm... actually... that could be used as a fudge factor to get >> everything to "match up"... :) >> >> Also, attached is my latest revision. I have found that NARS deduction >> does not quite fit with my definitions. Induction and abduction are OK >> so far. If in the end I merely have something "close" to NARS, I will >> consider this a success-- it is an interpretation that fits well >> enough to show where NARS essentially differs from probability theory. >> >> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 5:54 PM, Pei Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Yes, I know them, though I don't like any of them that I've seen. I >>> wonder Abram can find something better. >>> >>> To tell you the truth, my whole idea of confidence actually came from >>> a probabilistic formula, after my re-interpretation of it. >>> >>> Pei >>> >>> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 4:35 PM, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Note that formally, the >>>> >>>> c = n/(n+k) >>>> >>>> equation also exists in the math of the beta distribution, which is used >>>> in Walley's imprecise probability theory and also in PLN's indefinite >>>> probabilities... >>>> >>>> So there seems some hope of making such a correspondence, based on >>>> algebraic evidence... >>>> >>>> ben >>>> >>>> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 4:29 PM, Pei Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Abram, >>>>> >>>>> Can your approach gives the Confidence measurement a probabilistic >>>>> interpretation? It is what really differs NARS from the other >>>>> approaches. >>>>> >>>>> Pei >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 11:22 PM, Abram Demski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>> This example also shows why NARS and PLN are similar on deduction, but >>>>> >>> very different in abduction and induction. >>>>> >> >>>>> >> Yes. One of my biggest practical complaints with NARS is that the >>>>> >> induction >>>>> >> and abduction truth value formulas don't make that much sense to me. >>>>> > >>>>> > Interesting in the context of these statements that my current >>>>> > "justification" for NARS probabilistically justifies induction and >>>>> > abduction but isn't as clear concerning deduction. (I'm working on >>>>> > it...) >>>>> > >>>>> > --Abram Demski >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > ------------------------------------------- >>>>> > agi >>>>> > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now >>>>> > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ >>>>> > Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; >>>>> > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------- >>>>> agi >>>>> Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now >>>>> RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ >>>>> Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; >>>>> Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Ben Goertzel, PhD >>>> CEO, Novamente LLC and Biomind LLC >>>> Director of Research, SIAI >>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> >>>> "Nothing will ever be attempted if all possible objections must be first >>>> overcome " - Dr Samuel Johnson >>>> >>>> >>>> ________________________________ >>>> agi | Archives | Modify Your Subscription >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------- >>> agi >>> Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now >>> RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ >>> Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; >>> Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------- >> agi >> Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now >> RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ >> Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; >> Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com >> > > > > ------------------------------------------- > agi > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ > Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=114414975-3c8e69 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
