--- On Thu, 10/30/08, Pei Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Even if that is the case, I don't accept it as a reason > to tolerant this opinion in AGI research.
The point is not that AGI should model things at the level of atoms. The point is that we should apply the principle of Occam's Razor to machine learning and AGI. We already do that in all practical learning algorithms. For example in NARS, a link between two concepts like (if X then Y) has a probability and a confidence that depends on the counts of (X,Y) and (X, not Y). This model is a simplification from a sequence of n events (with algorithmic complexity 2n) to two small integers (with algorithmic complexity 2 log n). The reason this often works in practice is Occam's Razor. That might not be the case if physics were not computable. -- Matt Mahoney, [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------- 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
