.Net can still be used with C++ but they do not seem to be encouraging
programmers to use it.  However, I doubt if they are going to discontinue
their C++ compliers in the near future.

Thanks for the reference to the Constructivist approach.  I had heard of
constructivist methods before but I really did not recall anything about
them until someone mentioned something about them last month in another
group.  I think my ideas go beyond the Constructivist method but there are
many similarities.


On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Piaget Modeler <[email protected]>wrote:

> You'd be using C# instead of C++ if you went with .Net.
>
> ~PM
>
>
>
> > Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 14:17:26 -0500
>
> > Subject: Re: [agi] I guess I don't have AGI all figured out.
> > From: [email protected]
> > To: [email protected]
> >
> > Reflection seems interesting I want to read more about it. But there
> > are other steps that I could have taken which would have been more
> > direct. I could for example use a Debug dump and dump the values of
> > the data when they were in the template section so that I could see
> > what they were. Or I could add other functions that would allow me to
> > see a value inside the template if I chose to. However, since I
> > realized that debugging wasn't going to end when the data management
> > part was working I felt that it was better to implement the templates
> > by type (within the classes that were organized around the arrays that
> > held the data). I did some timing tests and found that type arrays
> > could be used more efficiently than arrays which were built on
> > classes. It is probably little-O but it turns into Big-o when it is
> > used as frequently as my program uses them.
> >
> > I have been writing special algorithms to test the data structures as
> > I was working on them and I found that this made a big improvement in
> > development time. There have been no surprises like the situation
> > where ten or more bugs are interacting at the same time making the
> > debugging impossible.
> >
> > And I noticed that .Net does have reflection - but not for C++.
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Piaget Modeler
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Sounds like you need continuous integration techniques more than
> anything
> > > else. If you haven't already,
> > > for your next project assemble a Test Driven Development platform
> JUnit /
> > > NUnit etc. and develop test cases for
> > > each of your Abstract Data Types (or classes as they're called
> nowadays).
> > >
> > > Best of luck.
> > >
> > > ~PM
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 09:46:38 -0500
> > >
> > > Subject: Re: [agi] I guess I don't have AGI all figured out.
> > > From: [email protected]
> > > To: [email protected]
> > >
> > > I didn't mean to be so sharply critical. I was trying to say that if a
> > > programmer thinks an AGI program could start with a simple program and
> build
> > > itself then he should try to create something that actually had the
> power to
> > > learn how to build itself. I have thought about this and it is not easy
> > > "simple" but simple examples are probably feasible. If someone thinks
> that
> > > an AGI program can feasibly start out simple then try something and
> let us
> > > know how far you get it to go.
> > >
> > > I was using my C++ templates with data arrays. So all the most common
> > > functions of putting data into the array, finding it, retrieving it,
> > > distributing the data (in the mundane sense of the term), creating an
> index
> > > over the distributed data and the implementation of accessing the
> index as
> > > the first step to searching for the data and coordinating one or two
> data
> > > accesses was what I encoded into the template form. The moment I
> started
> > > working with coordinated data for the most elementary stages of the AI
> part
> > > where I needed three, four and more data arrays to be used in a
> coordinated
> > > way, the debugging problem turned into an impossible task. Although the
> > > templates had been tested I hadn't tested the all the particular
> methods
> > > that the templates could be a part of and I wasn't able to follow all
> the
> > > debug paths into the templates because the programming debugger did not
> > > reveal the values or the types of data when it stepped through the
> > > templates.
> > >
> > > Case-Based Reasoning is a historical AI method. You make them
> extensible by
> > > using a particular context-free language that allows you to program the
> > > computer to represent new cases. Theoretically, contrary to Tintner's
> > > argument, it would be feasible to use CBR to discover and represent
> truly
> > > novel situations. However, this theoretical argument is not easy if you
> > > haven't already been there and the tendency to rely on already proven
> > > methods means that it is pretty predictable that someone who tries
> > > Case-Based Reasoning is not going to figure this out. I want my AGI
> program
> > > to be able to do some genuine learning using a trial and error method.
> Just
> > > as I (believe that I) don't need to use predefined human-language
> syntax to
> > > get the program to acquire a rudimentary human language, I also
> (believe
> > > that I) don't need to use predefined cases to get the program to
> acquire
> > > cases where it could use case-based reasoning.
> > >
> > > Chomsky's hierarchy of grammar is based on computational methods.
> Whenever
> > > we write a computer program we are using computational methods so we
> can say
> > > that a computer program is supplied with predefined grammars. However,
> the
> > > point is that my program will have the potential to acquire new pieces
> of
> > > grammar. Similarly every program uses case-based reasoning in the form
> of
> > > conditional branches. However, the goal I am striving for is to get the
> > > program to do some genuine learning on its own. This means that it will
> > > have to use a trial and error approach to learn about new things. So it
> > > will be able to pick up something that looks a lot like case based
> reasoning
> > > without my programming it directly into the program. On the other
> hand, if
> > > I was successful then it might be argued that I had developed a new
> way of
> > > programming a computer through instruction. This new way of programming
> > > would not produce programs the way we usually do because what the
> program
> > > could learn would be mediated by many other impressions that it formed
> from
> > > its IO data environment. So while it might learn, for example, to
> build a
> > > case for discerning when I am trying to teach it something new, it
> might
> > > mediate an effective method for learning new things with other
> information
> > > that it had previously acquired that it might use to interpret the new
> > > information with something that it had already learned. Since
> interpreting
> > > a situation in terms of similar situations which it knew something
> about is
> > > the natural policy of artificial thought this should be something that
> > > occurs frequently. So its recognition that I am trying to teach it
> something
> > > new might be mediated and defeated by its recognition that what I was
> trying
> > > to teach seemed familiar in some way.
> > >
> > > Should I have answered no but I have studied case-based reasoning
> carefully
> > > and I was using templates to represent char strings and ID values that
> refer
> > > to collections of derived relations between the data objects and
> strings
> > > formed from ID references and functional operations designed to work
> with
> > > the ID references?
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Piaget Modeler <
> [email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > Have you tried any Case-Based Reasoning approaches?
> > >
> > > If engineered correctly the cases can be human readable, yet
> extensible.
> > > Starting with simple cases and increasing complexity.
> > >
> > > What data structures were your common templates attempting to embody?
> > >
> > > ~PM
> > >
> > >
> > > AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription
> > > AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jim Bromer
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------
> > AGI
> > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
> > RSS Feed:
> https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/19999924-4a978ccc
>
> > Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;
> > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
>    *AGI* | Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now>
> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/24379807-f5817f28> |
> Modify<https://www.listbox.com/member/?&;>Your Subscription
> <http://www.listbox.com>
>



-- 
Jim Bromer



-------------------------------------------
AGI
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424
Modify Your Subscription: 
https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

Reply via email to