On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 1:23 PM, Dr. Matthias Heger wrote:
> Natural communication and language understanding is completely comparable
> with common processes in computer science. There is an internal data
> representation. A subset of this data is translated into a linguistic string
> and transfer
On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 11:50 PM, Dr. Matthias Heger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> But in any case there is a complete distinction between D and L. The brain
> never sends entities of D to its output region but it sends entities of L.
> Therefore there must be a strict separation between language
hias Heger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2008 3:50 PM
Subject: AW: [agi] Re: Meaning, communication and understanding
The language model does not need interaction with the environment when the
language model is already complete which is possible for formal languages
The language model does not need interaction with the environment when the
language model is already complete which is possible for formal languages
but nearly impossible for natural language. That is the reason why formal
language need much less cost.
If the language must be learned then things a
On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 5:23 PM, Dr. Matthias Heger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree that understanding is the process of integrating different models,
> different meanings, different pieces of information as seen by your
> model. But this integrating just matching and not extending the own mod
would reduce the immense costs of simulating real worlds and
additionally concentrating on *at least two* domains at the same time.
-Matthias
Vladimir Nesov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
Gesendet: Sonntag, 19. Oktober 2008 12:59
An: agi@v2.listbox.com
Betreff: [agi] Re: Meaning, communication
On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> regarding denotational semantics:
> I prefer to think of the meaning of X as the fuzzy set of patterns
> associated with X. (In fact, I recall giving a talk on this topic at a
> meeting of the American Math Society in 199
regarding denotational semantics:
I prefer to think of the meaning of X as the fuzzy set of patterns
associated with X. (In fact, I recall giving a talk on this topic at a
meeting of the American Math Society in 1990 ;-)
On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 6:59 AM, Vladimir Nesov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Dr. Matthias Heger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The process of outwardly expressing meaning may be fundamental to any social
> intelligence but the process itself needs not much intelligence.
>
> Every email program can receive meaning, store meaning and it can exp
