Somehow, and in some way, it seems that all the work being done with swarming drones would be informative to this discussion. I do not know a lot about it, IRL, and even that small amount is colored by the fiction in Daniel Suarez's *Kill Decision.*
davew On Fri, Apr 15, 2022, at 5:14 PM, David Eric Smith wrote: > Great resource, Glen, thank you, > > Your summary is indeed just the point I was after. > > Also good to know you have worked in this space. > > And the PaLM looks like a project it would be fun to be on the inside of. > > I realize, in trying to think what to answer, that there is a(n > obvious) meta-question behind the way I asked these things. When is > one thing a model for another, in some way that confers insight? > > I have, off and on, followed some of the communication-bot projects > that come up. The results often look to me like small algorithms > running preset courses, with very little they can generate on their own > that is a model for anything we have had real trouble understanding > about the experience of existing or the resources that language gives > us for representing or expressing the nature of that experience. I > have this optimism of the amateur outsider that each new generation of > computational tasks will have enough richness that the problems we can > push them to solve with blunt reinforcement rewards will start to > overlap better with the particulars of discourse. > > Many thanks, > > Eric > > > >> On Apr 14, 2022, at 9:33 PM, glen <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Apologies for the violent reduction of your question. But I'm not smart >> enough to think with so many words. So I have to reduce it in order to think >> about it. 8^D Here's my reduction: >> >> 1a Will bots represent their insides? >> 2a Would the (social) coordination of bots be linguistic? >> >> Has anyone tried building a system of Communicating Bots? >> >> I can answer the last with "yes, I have", but not in any sort of academic, >> scholarly, industrial, or any other serious context. So, really my "yes" is >> a "no, I haven't". But the project I was on did get at the question of what >> such things might tell us. I'll skip to the end and render my opinion and >> only go into the details if needed. We built 2 bots, both intended to >> interact with children in an augmented reality art display. The bots could >> talk to both the children and each other. To see how it would go before the >> event, we set them loose in an IRC chat room. There were 2 notable effects: >> 1) their conversations usually had a relatively short transient, maybe 100 >> sentences? I forget. Sometimes it seemed to go on for a long time. But >> mostly they were short interactions. And 2) they tended to explore the edge >> cases of their corpora. Each bot was programmed with a different corpus and >> their interaction tended to the corpus "leaves". >> >> Now, our AI was not really AI as we're talking about it, here. It wasn't ML. >> We programmed in, manually, an ontology and a grammar by which that ontology >> was walked. So, whether it would do the same with one of these inductive MLs >> is unlikely. But, to target your sentiment that it seems like the first >> thing someone would do, it *was* the first thing we did. 8^D >> >> Also, re the complexity of the gen-phen map, in context learning, etc., this >> came across my desk recently: >> >> Pathways Language Model (PaLM): Scaling to 540 Billion Parameters for >> Breakthrough Performance >> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fai.googleblog.com%2f2022%2f04%2fpathways-language-model-palm-scaling-to.html%3fm%3d1&c=E,1,c8E6lUAGCKhk8Yjf3gSMmVDygrPBDHb3EIPADLxAabc9zjDgQOw7b-osl4MdPwwky20YdrMJ5GnfCTgfSbDmksLXOvbUX98JjSLcyHL85Drj&typo=1 >> >> I hadn't read it till my insomnia this morning. But it seems to partially >> answer the robustness/polyphenism question I asked. >> >> >> >> On 4/13/22 13:35, David Eric Smith wrote: >>> So Glen’s line of questioning here prompts a question in me. Partly >>> ignorant (can’t be helped) and partly lazy (hasn’t been helped). >>> We have two things we have said at various time we would like to understand: >>> 1. Unpacking the black box of whatever-NN representations of patterns; >>> 2. Getting to a “theory” of “what language is” and how we should think of >>> its tokens and structures and acts in relation to not-clearly-conceived >>> notions of “meaning” or “reality”, on which language is supposed to be some >>> sort of window, however dirty. >>> So if we gave a bunch of autonomously-hosted NNs some load of work to keep >>> them all busy, and offered them signal-exchange that, if they happened to, >>> they could find ways to employ to coordinate each other’s >>> autonomously-generated operations: >>> 1A. Would one of the things their emergent signaling systems do be to >>> constitute representations of the “inside” of the “black box” we have been >>> saying we want representations of, not simply coextensive with reporting >>> the input-output pairs that the black box is producing? and; >>> 2A. Would their whole coordination system be in any interesting sense an >>> instance of “language”, and since we would be able to look at the whole >>> thing, and not be restricted to operating through the channel of exchanged >>> signals, would there be anything interesting to learn about the inherent >>> distortions or artifacts or lacunae of language, as referred to some more >>> broadly-anchored senses of “meaning” or “reality”? >>> I could imagine that we would complain that the coordination-traffic >>> purported to be representations of the black box, but that they did a >>> terrible job of actually being that (or one that we couldn’t use to satisfy >>> what _we_ want from a representation), but perhaps we could see some >>> familiar patterns in the disappointments (?). >>> To cut to a small, concrete dataset, we could try it with a kind of >>> bootstrapping partition of the zero-shot translation, in which we >>> autonomously host translation-learning on subsets of languages, but we keep >>> firewalls between the learners so that for every learner, there are >>> languages or language pairs to which it is not given direct access. We >>> have reason to think that each learner would develop a decent version of >>> some internal meta-language, and that there would be coherences of >>> structure across them, since that is what the zero-shot team claims already >>> to have demonstrated. But with different subsets of languages as inputs >>> (and perhaps not less, accidents of the training path just due to noise), >>> there should also be differences and things each one misses. >>> Cross-platform signaling could at least in principle have some available >>> information to convey, as well as much information that it would not need >>> to convey because the shared ancestry of the learning algorithms on each >>> platform makes talking about it unnecessary. The target we would be after >>> in posing the problem is, to what degree is the cross-platform >>> communication insightful to us about the thing we have said we want a >>> representation of (the “meta-language” “within” each zero-shot learner, >>> which is its version of some patterns in the world). >>> Has a lot of this already been done by somebody? It seems like the first >>> thing that somebody who knows nothing would propose to do, so I assume it >>> has already been done to the point where people lost interest and went on >>> to something else. >> >> -- >> Mɥǝu ǝlǝdɥɐuʇs ɟᴉƃɥʇ' ʇɥǝ ƃɹɐss snɟɟǝɹs˙ >> >> .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - . >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 >> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2f%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,RM7o6LI41b07O-GtvvgCzthiYrldlcdxVwh-lFbAHXoRe_tSY0xaYhxb2ljkAUl_wueX2qE6cQevn8h8pjaGk7S_zn3d7Yz61H-Yc90yz6FlqI48QvHEDr0,&typo=1 >> un/subscribe >> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,e15F6qvW82TSHCZBUQp8Bsw9qiAJaYv4mi-RI7qr19gFmXVhoCgPfey_ibtCW_lKtmM2rxzuuA7teMxJgjlDua5JEob3dpBtWjIBbDx8Kn68NcM6_BOZfWEzFT2c&typo=1 >> FRIAM-COMIC >> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,ESyfNx2jvZOYcM4NyHvaTChb9MzsqhNGSe4ZJfObmyi1QykkvLL423xyFUU6czqf0HB24IOL6jCsWDhCXkvo0qEuKKlwanVnp_luPRYvTNnblBu0LBE,&typo=1 >> archives: >> 5/2017 thru present >> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fpipermail%2ffriam_redfish.com%2f&c=E,1,l17ymm-LJ-d8hf-uN266y-R1E3CTB02gRNBSRZ4MP5mRk-7MOKs-Eienb2EGV5BDAhlMG7VMkYCKcEcDprAGIMbkr8y7-RvCdiopQrKAkoXRI3aqpjSW_Hnkg1RN&typo=1 >> 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ > > > > .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - . > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam > un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > archives: > 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ > 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
