This is based purely on reading the wikipedia entry on Operator
grammar, which I find very interesting. I'm hoping someone out there
knows enough about this to answer some questions :^)
Wikipedia says that various quantities are learnable because they can
in principle be determined by data.
On 5/22/07, Derek Zahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pei,
As part of my ongoing AGI education, I am beginning to study NARS in some
detail.
Thanks for the interest. I'll do my best to help, though since I'm on
vacation in China, I may not be able to process my emails as usual.
As has been
Mark Waser wrote:
AGIs (at least those that could run on current computers)
cannot really get excited about anything. It's like when you represent
the pain intensity with a number. No matter how high the number goes,
it doesn't really hurt. Real feelings - that's the key difference
between us
Hi,
On 5/23/07, Mark Waser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Jiri Jelinek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 5/20/07, Mark Waser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Jiri Jelinek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 5/16/07, Mark Waser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-
Check bigrams (or, more interestingly, trigrams) in computational
linguistics.
Department of Information Systems
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone: (+27)-(0)21-6504256
Fax: (+27)-(0)21-6502280
Office: Leslie Commerce 4.21
Eric Baum [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2007/05/23 15:36:20
One way to parametrize
Universal compassion and tolerance are the ultimate consequences of
enlightenment
which one Matt on the list equated IMHO erroneously to high-orbit
intelligence
methinx subtle humour is a much better proxy for intelligence
Jean-Paul
member of the 'let Murray stay' advocacy group aka 'the write
A google search on operator grammar + trigram
yields nada.
A google search on operator grammar + bigram yields nothing
interesting.
I've seen papers on statistical language parsing before,
including trigrams etc. Not so clear to me the extent to which
they've been merged with Harris's work.
I'll take a shot at answering some of your questions as someone who has done
some work and research but is certainly not claiming to be an expert . . . .
Wikipedia says that various quantities are learnable because they can
in principle be determined by data. What is known about whether they
A meta-question here with some prefatory information . . . .
The reason why I top-post (and when I do so, I *never* put content inside)
is because I frequently find it *really* convenient to have the entire text
of the previous message or two (no more) immediately available for
reference.
Pei Wang writes:
Thanks for the interest. I'll do my best to help, though since I'm on
vacation in China, I may not be able to process my emails as usual.
Thank you for your response. I'm planning over the course of the rest of the
year to look in-depth at all of the AGI projects that
The scholar and gentleman Jean-Paul Van Belle wrote:
Universal compassion and tolerance are the ultimate
consequences of enlightenment which one Matt on the
list equated IMHO erroneously to high-orbit intelligence
methinx subtle humour is a much better proxy for intelligence
Jean-Paul
As I think about it, one problem is, depending on how its
parametrized, its not going to build much of a world model.
Say for example it uses trigrams. The average hs grad knows
something like 50,000 words. So there are something like 10^17
trigrams. It will never see enough data to build a
On 5/23/07, Mark Waser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
systems in that there has been success in processing huge amounts (corpuses,
corpi? :-) of data and producing results -- but it's *clearly* not the way
corpora
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or
Richard Mark Waser wrote:
AGIs (at least those that could run on current computers)
cannot really get excited about anything. It's like when you
Richard represent
the pain intensity with a number. No matter how high the number
Richard goes,
it doesn't really hurt. Real feelings - that's the
AGIs (at least those that could run on current computers) cannot
really get excited about anything. It's like when you represent the
pain intensity with a number. No matter how high the number goes,
it doesn't really hurt. Real feelings - that's the key difference
between us and them and the
Mike Eric Baum: What is Thought [claims that] feelings.are
Mike explainable by a computational model.
Mike Feelings/ emotions are generated by the brain's computations,
Mike certainly. But they are physical/ body events. Does your Turing
Mike machine have a body other than that of some kind of
On 5/23/07, Derek Zahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm planning over the course of the rest of
the year to look in-depth at all of the AGI projects that include a
significant implementation component (that is, those that are not just books
musing about the nature of intelligence -- I am also
For those of you interested in type-driven program synthesis:
http://www.cs.washington.edu/homes/blerner/seminal.html
(quick link:
http://www.cs.washington.edu/homes/blerner/files/seminal-visitdays.ppt)
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change
P.S. Eric, I haven't forgotten your question to me, will try to address it
in time - the answer is complex.
-
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
Eric,
The point is simply that you can only fully simulate emotions with a body as
well as a brain. And emotions while identified by the conscious brain are
felt with the body
I don't find it at all hard to understand - I fully agree - that emotions
are generated as a result of
Pei,
Yes, the book is the best source for most of the topics. Sorry for the
absurd price, which I have no way to influence.
It's $190. Somebody is making a lot of money on each copy and
I'm sure it's not you. To get a 400 page hard cover published at
lulu.com is more like $25.
Shane
Shane,
Well, I actually considered Lulu and similar publishers, though as the
last option. It is much easier to publish with them, but given the
nature of NARS, such a publisher will make the book even more likely
to be classified as by a crackpot. :(
I continued to look for a publisher with
On Wednesday 23 May 2007 06:34:29 pm Mike Tintner wrote:
My underlying argument, though, is that your (or any) computational model
of emotions, if it does not also include a body, will be fundamentally
flawed both physically AND computationally.
Does everyone here know what an ICE is in
On May 23, 2007, at 4:17 PM, Pei Wang wrote:
I continued to look for a publisher with tough peer-review procedure,
even after the manuscript had been rejected by more than a dozen of
them. Though the price excludes most of individual buyers, it may be
more likely for a research library to buy a
24 matches
Mail list logo
