>> No system can make those kinds of inventions without sophisticated inference >> control. Concept creation of course is required also, though.
I'd argue that this is bad phrasing. Sure, effective control is necessary to create the concepts that you need to fulfill your goals (as opposed to far too many random unuseful concepts) . . . . But it isn't "Concept creation of course is required also", it really is "Effective control is necessary for effective concept creation which is necessary for effective goal fulfillment." And assuming that control must be sophisticated and necessarily entirely in the realm of inference are just assumptions . . . . :-) ----- Original Message ----- From: Ben Goertzel To: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 3:54 PM Subject: **SPAM** Re: AW: [agi] If your AGI can't learn to play chess it is no AGI >> Mathematics, though, is interesting in other ways. I don't believe that much of mathematics involves the logical transformations performed in proof steps. A system that invents new fields of mathematics, new terms, new mathematical "ideas" -- that is truly interesting. Inference control is boring, but inventing mathematical induction, complex numbers, or ring theory -- THAT is AGI-worthy. Is this different from generic concept formulation and explanation (just in a slightly different domain)? No system can make those kinds of inventions without sophisticated inference control. Concept creation of course is required also, though. -- Ben ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=117534816-b15a34 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
