The way I've read Hawkins' and company's work so far is that they view HTM as a cognitive engine that, while perceptually based, would essentially drive other cognitive functions, including behavior. I think you're right that they would agree that these additional cognitive functions would likely need extensions to the architecture.
I think that perception has gotten short shrift in AI for a long time, so I'm very hapy to see that they're taking this approach (I am biased, however, being a Master's student under Stan Franklin at the University of Memphis working on -- you guessed it -- the perception module for Stan's LIDA system).
-- Scott
On 6/2/06, Mike Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> The theoretical presumption here is that once you've solve the problem
> of recognizing moderately complex patterns in perceptual data streams,
> then you're essentially done with the AGI problem and the rest is just
> some wrappers placed around your perception code. I don't think
> so.... I think they are building a nice perceptual pattern
> recognition module, and waving their hands around arguing that it
> actually is just an exemplar for an approach that can be more general.
Some parts of the article definitely overemphasize the potential for
perceptual pattern recognition to account for a large number of
cognitive processes. But I think that, ultimately, Hawkins et al
probably agree with your characterization of perception. For
instance, they spend some time discussing the need to hook up an
external episodic memory module in order to get more powerful
behavior. So surely, from an AGI perspective, they believe that HTM
would be just one (albeit important) element in a more complex system.
Mike
-------
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription,
please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
