Matt,
Suppose you write a program that inputs jokes or cartoons and outputs whether
or not they are funny. Then there is an iterative process by which you can
create funny jokes or cartoons. Write a program that inputs a movie and
outputs a rating of 1 to 5 stars. Then you have an iterative
Matt,
On 9/7/08, Matt Mahoney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- On Sun, 9/7/08, Steve Richfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. I believe that there is some VERY fertile but untilled ground, which
if it is half as good as it looks, could yield AGI a LOT cheaper than
other higher estimates. Of
Hi,
I am curious about the result you mention. You say that the genetic
algorithm stopped search very quickly. Why? It sounds like they want
to search to go longer, but can't they just tell it to go longer if
they want it to? And to reduce convergence, can't they just increase
the level of
From: Matt Mahoney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- On Sun, 9/7/08, John G. Rose [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: John G. Rose [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Language modeling (was Re: [agi] draft for comment)
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Date: Sunday, September 7, 2008, 9:15 AM
From: Matt
From the article:
A team of biologists and chemists [lab led by Jack Szostak, a molecular
biologist at Harvard Medical School] is closing in on bringing non-living
matter to life.
It's not as Frankensteinian as it sounds. Instead, a lab led by Jack
Szostak, a molecular biologist at Harvard
A somewhat revised version of my paper is at:
http://www.geocities.com/genericai/AGI-ch4-logic-9Sep2008.pdf
(sorry it is now a book chapter and the bookmarks are lost when extracting)
On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 7:05 PM, Pei Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I intend to use NARS confidence in a way
On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 12:05 PM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
but in a PLN approach this could be avoided by looking at
IntensionalInheritance B A
rather than extensional inheritance..
The question is how do you know when to apply the intensional
inheritance, instead of the
Sorry I don't have the time to type a detailed reply, but for your
second point, see the example in
http://www.cogsci.indiana.edu/pub/wang.fuzziness.ps , page 9, 4th
paragraph:
If these two types of uncertainty [randomness and fuzziness] are
different, why bother to treat them in an uniform way?
On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 4:27 AM, Pei Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry I don't have the time to type a detailed reply, but for your
second point, see the example in
http://www.cogsci.indiana.edu/pub/wang.fuzziness.ps , page 9, 4th
paragraph:
If these two types of uncertainty [randomness and
I've reflected that superintelligence could emerge through genetic or
pharmaceutical options before cybernetic ones, maybe by necessity. I
am really rooting for cybernetic enlightenment to guide our use of the
other two, though.
On 9/8/08, Brad Paulsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From the
You can implement a new workaround to bootstrap your organisms past
each local maximum, like catalyzing the transition from water to land
over and over. I find this leads to cheats that narrow the search in
unpredictable ways, though. This problem comes up again and again.
Maybe some kind of
11 matches
Mail list logo
