Re: [agi] [Science Daily] Our Unconscious Brain Makes The Best Decisions Possible
On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 3:05 PM, Jim Bromer jimbro...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 4:02 PM, Richard Loosemore r...@lightlink.com wrote: My friend Mike Oaksford in the UK has written several papers giving a higher level cognitive theory that says that people are, in fact, doing something like bayesian estimation when then make judgments. In fact, people are very good at being bayesians, contra the loud protests of the I Am A Bayesian Rationalist crowd, who think they were the first to do it. Richard Loosemore That sounds like an easy hypothesis to test. Except for a problem. Previous learning would be relevant to the solving of the problems and would produce results that could not be totally accounted for. Complexity, in the complicated sense of the term, is relevant to this problem, both in the complexity of how previous learning that might influence decision making and the possible (likely) complexity of the process of judgment itself. If extensive tests showed that people overwhelmingly made judgments that were Bayesianesque then this conjecture would be important. The problem is, that since the numerous possible influences of previous learning has to be ruled out, I would suspect that any test for Bayesian-like reasoning would have to be kept so simple that it would not add anything new to our knowledge. If judgment was that simple most of the programmers in this list would have really great AGI programs by now, because simple weighted decision making is really easy to program. The problem occurs when you realize that it is just not that easy. I think Anderson was the first to advocate weighted decision making in AI and my recollection is that he was writing his theories back in the 1970's. Jim Bromer One other thing. My interest in studies of cognitive science is how the results of some study might be related to advanced AI, what is called AGI in this group. The use of weighted reasoning seems attractive and if these kinds of methods do actually conform to some cognitive processes then that would be a tremendous justification for their use in AGI projects - along with other methods that would be necessary to actually simulate or produce conceptually integrated judgement. But, one of the major design problems with tests that use statistical methods to demonstrate that some cognitive function of reasoning seems to conform with statistical processes is that since the artifacts of the statistical method itself may obscure the results, the design of the sample has to be called into question and the proposition restudied using other design models capable of accounting for possible sources of artifact error. Jim Bromer --- 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=8660244id_secret=123753653-47f84b Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] [Science Daily] Our Unconscious Brain Makes The Best Decisions Possible
On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 11:12 AM, Jim Bromer jimbro...@gmail.com wrote: If extensive tests showed that people overwhelmingly made judgments that were Bayesianesque then this conjecture would be important. The problem is, that since the numerous possible influences of previous learning has to be ruled out, I would suspect that any test for Bayesian-like reasoning would have to be kept so simple that it would not add anything new to our knowledge. If judgment was that simple most of the programmers in this list would have really great AGI programs by now, because simple weighted decision making is really easy to program. The problem occurs when you realize that it is just not that easy. I think Anderson was the first to advocate weighted decision making in AI and my recollection is that he was writing his theories back in the 1970's. Jim Bromer One other thing. My interest in studies of cognitive science is how the results of some study might be related to advanced AI, what is called AGI in this group. The use of weighted reasoning seems attractive and if these kinds of methods do actually conform to some cognitive processes then that would be a tremendous justification for their use in AGI projects - along with other methods that would be necessary to actually simulate or produce conceptually integrated judgement. But, one of the major design problems with tests that use statistical methods to demonstrate that some cognitive function of reasoning seems to conform with statistical processes is that since the artifacts of the statistical method itself may obscure the results, the design of the sample has to be called into question and the proposition restudied using other design models capable of accounting for possible sources of artifact error. Jim Bromer I did not mean to direct this criticism at any one study or any one person. Not only can the design of a study be questioned on the basis of whether or not the question tends to lead to the kind of results that the study purports to show, but the methods of the analysis can also leave artifacts or other subtle influences on the results as well. This not only goes for statistical studies, but could be found in logical studies, numerical studies, linguistic studies, image-based studies and so on. Ok, this isn't news but some people haven't learned it in yet. Jim Bromer --- 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=8660244id_secret=123753653-47f84b Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] [Science Daily] Our Unconscious Brain Makes The Best Decisions Possible
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 4:02 PM, Richard Loosemore r...@lightlink.com wrote: My friend Mike Oaksford in the UK has written several papers giving a higher level cognitive theory that says that people are, in fact, doing something like bayesian estimation when then make judgments. In fact, people are very good at being bayesians, contra the loud protests of the I Am A Bayesian Rationalist crowd, who think they were the first to do it. Richard Loosemore That sounds like an easy hypothesis to test. Except for a problem. Previous learning would be relevant to the solving of the problems and would produce results that could not be totally accounted for. Complexity, in the complicated sense of the term, is relevant to this problem, both in the complexity of how previous learning that might influence decision making and the possible (likely) complexity of the process of judgment itself. If extensive tests showed that people overwhelmingly made judgments that were Bayesianesque then this conjecture would be important. The problem is, that since the numerous possible influences of previous learning has to be ruled out, I would suspect that any test for Bayesian-like reasoning would have to be kept so simple that it would not add anything new to our knowledge. If judgment was that simple most of the programmers in this list would have really great AGI programs by now, because simple weighted decision making is really easy to program. The problem occurs when you realize that it is just not that easy. I think Anderson was the first to advocate weighted decision making in AI and my recollection is that he was writing his theories back in the 1970's. Jim Bromer --- 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=8660244id_secret=123753653-47f84b Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] [Science Daily] Our Unconscious Brain Makes The Best Decisions Possible
Jim Bromer wrote: On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 4:02 PM, Richard Loosemore r...@lightlink.com wrote: My friend Mike Oaksford in the UK has written several papers giving a higher level cognitive theory that says that people are, in fact, doing something like bayesian estimation when then make judgments. In fact, people are very good at being bayesians, contra the loud protests of the I Am A Bayesian Rationalist crowd, who think they were the first to do it. Richard Loosemore That sounds like an easy hypothesis to test. Except for a problem. Previous learning would be relevant to the solving of the problems and would produce results that could not be totally accounted for. Complexity, in the complicated sense of the term, is relevant to this problem, both in the complexity of how previous learning that might influence decision making and the possible (likely) complexity of the process of judgment itself. If extensive tests showed that people overwhelmingly made judgments that were Bayesianesque then this conjecture would be important. The problem is, that since the numerous possible influences of previous learning has to be ruled out, I would suspect that any test for Bayesian-like reasoning would have to be kept so simple that it would not add anything new to our knowledge. Uh... you have to actually read the research to know how they came to these conclusions. Take it from me, they are mite bit ahead of you on this one :-). Richard Loosemore --- 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=8660244id_secret=123753653-47f84b Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] [Science Daily] Our Unconscious Brain Makes The Best Decisions Possible
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 12:44 AM, Kaj Sotala xue...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 10:15 PM, Lukasz Stafiniak lukst...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081224215542.htm Nothing surprising ;-) So they have a result saying that we're good at subconsciously estimating the direction in which dots on a screen are moving in. Apparently this can be safely generalized into Our Unconscious Brain Makes The Best Decisions Possible (implied: always). You're right, nothing surprising. Just the kind of unfounded, simplistic hyperbole I'd expect from your average science reporter. ;-) Here is a critique of the article: http://neurocritic.blogspot.com/2008/12/deal-no-deal-or-dots.html -- Vladimir Nesov robot...@gmail.com http://causalityrelay.wordpress.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=8660244id_secret=123753653-47f84b Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
[agi] [Science Daily] Our Unconscious Brain Makes The Best Decisions Possible
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081224215542.htm Nothing surprising ;-) --- 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=8660244id_secret=123753653-47f84b Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] [Science Daily] Our Unconscious Brain Makes The Best Decisions Possible
Lukasz Stafiniak wrote: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081224215542.htm Nothing surprising ;-) Nothing surprising?!! 8-) Don't say that too loudly, Yudkowsky might hear you. :-) The article is a bit naughty when it says, of Tversky and Kahnemann, that ...this has become conventional wisdom among cognition researchers. Actually, the original facts were interpreted in a variety of ways, some of which strongly disagreed with T K's original intepretation, just like this one you reference above. The only thing that is conventional wisdom is that the topic exists, and is the subject of dispute. And, as many people know, I made the mistake of challenging Yudkowsky on precisely this subject back in 2006, when he wrote an essay strongly advocating TK's original intepretation. Yudkowsky went completely berserk, accused me of being an idiot, having no brain, not reading any of the literature, never answering questions, and generally being something unspeakably worse than a slime-oozing crank. He literally wrote an essay denouncing me as equivalent to a flat-earth believing crackpot. When I suggested that someone go check some of his ravings with an outside authority, he banned me from his discussion list. Ah, such are the joys of being speaking truth to power(ful idiots). ;-) As far as this research goes, it sits somewhere down at the lower end of the available theories. My friend Mike Oaksford in the UK has written several papers giving a higher level cognitive theory that says that people are, in fact, doing something like bayesian estimation when then make judgments. In fact, people are very good at being bayesians, contra the loud protests of the I Am A Bayesian Rationalist crowd, who think they were the first to do it. Richard Loosemore --- 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=8660244id_secret=123753653-47f84b Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] [Science Daily] Our Unconscious Brain Makes The Best Decisions Possible
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 10:15 PM, Lukasz Stafiniak lukst...@gmail.com wrote: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081224215542.htm Nothing surprising ;-) So they have a result saying that we're good at subconsciously estimating the direction in which dots on a screen are moving in. Apparently this can be safely generalized into Our Unconscious Brain Makes The Best Decisions Possible (implied: always). You're right, nothing surprising. Just the kind of unfounded, simplistic hyperbole I'd expect from your average science reporter. ;-) --- 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=8660244id_secret=123753653-47f84b Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
Re: [agi] [Science Daily] Our Unconscious Brain Makes The Best Decisions Possible
--- On Mon, 12/29/08, Richard Loosemore r...@lightlink.com wrote: 8-) Don't say that too loudly, Yudkowsky might hear you. :-) ... When I suggested that someone go check some of his ravings with an outside authority, he banned me from his discussion list. Yudkowsky's side of the story might be of interest... http://www.sl4.org/archive/0608/15895.html http://www.sl4.org/archive/0608/15928.html -- Matt Mahoney, matmaho...@yahoo.com From: Richard Loosemore r...@lightlink.com Subject: Re: [agi] [Science Daily] Our Unconscious Brain Makes The Best Decisions Possible To: agi@v2.listbox.com Date: Monday, December 29, 2008, 4:02 PM Lukasz Stafiniak wrote: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081224215542.htm Nothing surprising ;-) Nothing surprising?!! 8-) Don't say that too loudly, Yudkowsky might hear you. :-) The article is a bit naughty when it says, of Tversky and Kahnemann, that ...this has become conventional wisdom among cognition researchers. Actually, the original facts were interpreted in a variety of ways, some of which strongly disagreed with T K's original intepretation, just like this one you reference above. The only thing that is conventional wisdom is that the topic exists, and is the subject of dispute. And, as many people know, I made the mistake of challenging Yudkowsky on precisely this subject back in 2006, when he wrote an essay strongly advocating TK's original intepretation. Yudkowsky went completely berserk, accused me of being an idiot, having no brain, not reading any of the literature, never answering questions, and generally being something unspeakably worse than a slime-oozing crank. He literally wrote an essay denouncing me as equivalent to a flat-earth believing crackpot. When I suggested that someone go check some of his ravings with an outside authority, he banned me from his discussion list. Ah, such are the joys of being speaking truth to power(ful idiots). ;-) As far as this research goes, it sits somewhere down at the lower end of the available theories. My friend Mike Oaksford in the UK has written several papers giving a higher level cognitive theory that says that people are, in fact, doing something like bayesian estimation when then make judgments. In fact, people are very good at being bayesians, contra the loud protests of the I Am A Bayesian Rationalist crowd, who think they were the first to do it. Richard Loosemore --- 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=8660244id_secret=123753653-47f84b Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
