the purpose of text is to convey something. It has to be interpreted. who cares about predicting the next word if you can't interpret a single bit of it.
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 3:43 PM, David Jones <[email protected]> wrote: > People do not predict the next words of text. We anticipate it, but when > something different shows up, we accept it if it is *explanatory*. Using > compression like algorithms though will never be able to do this type of > explanatory reasoning, which is required to disambiguate text. It is > certainly not sufficient for learning language, which is not at all about > predicting text. > > > On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Matt Mahoney <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Experiments in text compression show that text alone is sufficient for >> learning to predict text. >> >> I realize that for a machine to pass the Turing test, it needs a visual >> model of the world. Otherwise it would have a hard time with questions like >> "what word in this ernai1 did I spell wrong"? Obviously the easiest way to >> build a visual model is with vision, but it is not the only way. >> >> >> -- Matt Mahoney, [email protected] >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> *From:* David Jones <[email protected]> >> *To:* agi <[email protected]> >> *Sent:* Tue, June 29, 2010 3:22:33 PM >> >> *Subject:* Re: [agi] A Primary Distinction for an AGI >> >> I certainly agree that the techniques and explanation generating >> algorithms for learning language are hard coded into our brain. But, those >> techniques alone are not sufficient to learn language in the absence of >> sensory perception or some other way of getting the data required. >> >> Dave >> >> On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 3:19 PM, Matt Mahoney <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> David Jones wrote: >>> > The knowledge for interpreting language though should not be >>> pre-programmed. >>> >>> I think that human brains are wired differently than other animals to >>> make language learning easier. We have not been successful in training other >>> primates to speak, even though they have all the right anatomy such as vocal >>> chords, tongue, lips, etc. When primates have been taught sign language, >>> they have not successfully mastered forming sentences. >>> >>> >>> -- Matt Mahoney, [email protected] >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> *From:* David Jones <[email protected]> >>> *To:* agi <[email protected]> >>> *Sent:* Tue, June 29, 2010 3:00:09 PM >>> >>> *Subject:* Re: [agi] A Primary Distinction for an AGI >>> >>> The point I was trying to make is that an approach that tries to >>> interpret language just using language itself and without sufficient >>> information or the means to realistically acquire that information, *should* >>> fail. >>> >>> On the other hand, an approach that tries to interpret vision with >>> minimal upfront knowledge needs *should* succeed because the knowledge >>> required to automatically learn to interpret images is amenable to >>> preprogramming. In addition, such knowledge must be pre-programmed. The >>> knowledge for interpreting language though should not be pre-programmed. >>> >>> Dave >>> >>> On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Matt Mahoney <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> David Jones wrote: >>>> > I wish people understood this better. >>>> >>>> For example, animals can be intelligent even though they lack language >>>> because they can see. True, but an AGI with language skills is more useful >>>> than one without. >>>> >>>> And yes, I realize that language, vision, motor skills, hearing, and all >>>> the other senses and outputs are tied together. Skills in any area make >>>> learning the others easier. >>>> >>>> >>>> -- Matt Mahoney, [email protected] >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------ >>>> *From:* David Jones <[email protected]> >>>> *To:* agi <[email protected]> >>>> *Sent:* Tue, June 29, 2010 1:42:51 PM >>>> >>>> *Subject:* Re: [agi] A Primary Distinction for an AGI >>>> >>>> Mike, >>>> >>>> THIS is the flawed reasoning that causes people to ignore vision as the >>>> right way to create AGI. And I've finally come up with a great way to show >>>> you how wrong this reasoning is. >>>> >>>> I'll give you an extremely obvious argument that proves that vision >>>> requires much less knowledge to interpret than language does. Let's say >>>> that >>>> you have never been to egypt, you have never seen some particular movie >>>> before. But if you see the movie, an alien landscape, an alien world, a >>>> new >>>> place or any such new visual experience, you can immediately interpret it >>>> in >>>> terms of spacial, temporal, compositional and other relationships. >>>> >>>> Now, go to egypt and listen to them speak. Can you interpret it? Nope. >>>> Why?! Because you don't have enough information. The language itself does >>>> not contain any information to help you interpret it. We do not learn >>>> language simply by listening. We learn based on evidence from how the >>>> language is used and how it occurs in our daily lives. Without that >>>> experience, you cannot interpret it. >>>> >>>> But with vision, you do not need extra knowledge to interpret a new >>>> situation. You can recognize completely new objects without any training >>>> except for simply observing them in their natural state. >>>> >>>> I wish people understood this better. >>>> >>>> Dave >>>> >>>> On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 12:51 PM, Mike Tintner < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Just off the cuff here - isn't the same true for vision? You can't >>>>> learn vision from vision. Just as all NLP has no connection with the real >>>>> world, and totally relies on the human programmer's knowledge of that >>>>> world. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Your visual program actually relies totally on your visual "vocabulary" >>>>> - not its own. That is the inevitable penalty of processing unreal signals >>>>> on a computer screen which are not in fact connected to the real world any >>>>> more than the verbal/letter signals involved in NLP are. >>>>> >>>>> What you need to do - what anyone in your situation with anything like >>>>> your asprations needs to do - is to hook up with a roboticist. Everyone >>>>> here >>>>> should be doing that. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *From:* David Jones <[email protected]> >>>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 29, 2010 5:27 PM >>>>> *To:* agi <[email protected]> >>>>> *Subject:* Re: [agi] A Primary Distinction for an AGI >>>>> >>>>> You can't learn language from language without embedding way more >>>>> knowledge than is reasonable. Language does not contain the information >>>>> required for its interpretation. There is no *reason* to interpret the >>>>> language into any of the infinite possible interpretaions. There is >>>>> nothing >>>>> to explain but it requires explanatory reasoning to determine the correct >>>>> real world interpretation >>>>> >>>>> On Jun 29, 2010 10:58 AM, "Matt Mahoney" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> David Jones wrote: >>>>> > Natural language requires more than the words on the page in the real >>>>> world. Of... >>>>> Any knowledge that can be demonstrated over a text-only channel (as in >>>>> the Turing test) can also be learned over a text-only channel. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> > Cyc also is trying to store knowledge about a super complicated world >>>>> in simplistic forms and al... >>>>> Cyc failed because it lacks natural language. The vast knowledge store >>>>> of the internet is unintelligible to Cyc. The average person can't use it >>>>> because they don't speak Cycl and because they have neither the ability >>>>> nor >>>>> the patience to translate their implicit thoughts into augmented first >>>>> order >>>>> logic. Cyc's approach was understandable when they started in 1984 when >>>>> they >>>>> had neither the internet nor the vast computing power that is required to >>>>> learn natural language from unlabeled examples like children do. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> > Vision and other sensory interpretaion, on the other hand, do not >>>>> require more info because that... >>>>> Without natural language, your system will fail too. You don't have >>>>> enough computing power to learn language, much less the million times more >>>>> computing power you need to learn to see. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- Matt Mahoney, [email protected] >>>>> >>>>> ________________________________ >>>>> From: David Jones <[email protected]> >>>>> To: agi <[email protected]... >>>>> *Sent:* Mon, June 28, 2010 9:28:57 PM >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Subject: Re: [agi] A Primary Distinction for an AGI >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Natural language requires more than the words on the page in the real >>>>> world. Of course that didn't ... >>>>> *agi* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >>>>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> | >>>>> Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription >>>>> <http://www.listbox.com> >>>>> >>>>> *agi* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >>>>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> | >>>>> Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription >>>>> <http://www.listbox.com> >>>>> *agi* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >>>>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> | >>>>> Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription >>>>> <http://www.listbox.com> >>>>> >>>> >>>> *agi* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >>>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> | >>>> Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription >>>> <http://www.listbox.com> >>>> *agi* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >>>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> | >>>> Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription >>>> <http://www.listbox.com> >>>> >>> >>> *agi* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> | >>> Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription >>> <http://www.listbox.com> >>> *agi* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >>> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> | >>> Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription >>> <http://www.listbox.com> >>> >> >> *agi* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> | >> Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription >> <http://www.listbox.com> >> *agi* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now> >> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/> | >> Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>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=8660244-6e7fb59c Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
