I do not agree. Understanding a domain does not imply the ability to solve problems in that domain.
And the ability to solve problems in a domain even does not imply to have a generally a deeper understanding of that domain. Once again my example of the problem to find a path within a graph from node A to node B: Program p1 (= problem solver) can find a path. Program p2 (= expert in understanding) can verify and analyze paths. For instance, p2 could be able compare the length of the path for the first half of the nodes with the length of the path for the second half of the nodes. It is not necessary that P1 can do this as well. P2 can not necessarily find a path. But p1 can not necessarily analyze its solution. Understanding and problem solving are different things which might have a common subset but it is wrong that the one implies the other one or vice versa. And that's the main reason why natural language understanding is not necessarily AGI-complete. -Matthias Terren Suydam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Once again, there is a depth to understanding - it's not simply a binary proposition. Don't you agree that a grandmaster understands chess better than you do, even if his moves are understandable to you in hindsight? If I'm not good at math, I might not be able to solve y=3x+4 for x, but I might understand that y equals 3 times x plus four. My understanding is superficial compared to someone who can solve for x. Finally, don't you agree that understanding natural language requires solving problems? If not, how would you account for an AI's ability to understand novel metaphor? Terren --- On Thu, 10/23/08, Dr. Matthias Heger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: From: Dr. Matthias Heger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [agi] Understanding and Problem Solving To: [email protected] Date: Thursday, October 23, 2008, 1:47 AM Terren Suydam wrote: >>> Understanding goes far beyond mere knowledge - understanding *is* the ability to solve problems. One's understanding of a situation or problem is only as deep as one's (theoretical) ability to act in such a way as to achieve a desired outcome. <<< I disagree. A grandmaster of chess can explain his decisions and I will understand them. Einstein could explain his theory to other physicist(at least a subset) and they could understand it. I can read a proof in mathematics and I will understand it - because I only have to understand (= check) every step of the proof. Problem solving is much much more than only understanding. Problem solving is the ability to *create* a sequence of actions to change a system's state from A to a desired state B. For example: Problem Find a path from A to B within a graph. An algorithm which can check a solution and can answer details about the solution is not necessarily able to find a solution. -Matthias _____ agi | <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> | <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;> Modify Your Subscription <http://www.listbox.com> _____ agi | <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> | <https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; 7> Modify Your Subscription <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=117534816-b15a34 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
