On Tuesday 11 July 2006 18:49, James Ratcliff wrote: > > > So my guess is that focusing on the practical level for building an agi > > > system is sufficient, and it's easier than focusing on very abstract > > > levels. When you have a system that can e.g. play soccer, tie shoe > > > lases, build fences, throw objects to hit other objects, walk through a > > > terrain to a spot, cooperate with other systems in achieving these > > > practical goals > > * The problem is a certain level of abstractness must be achieved to > successfully carry through with all these tasks in a useful way.
That is the big problem, I agree, but not exactly the problem I wrote about. > If we > teach and train a robot to open a door, and then present it with another > type of door that opens differently, it will not be able to handle it, > unless it can reason at a higher level, using abstract knowledge of doors, > movement and handles. This is very important to making a general > intelligence. Simple visual object detection has the same problem. It > seems to appear in all lines of planning, acting and reasoning processes. Agreed. ---------------------- > > One thing I have been working on in these regards is the use of a 'script > system' It seems very impractical to have the AGI try and recreate these > plans every single time, and we can use the scripts to abstract and reason > about tasks and to create new scripts. We as humans live most of our lives > doing very repetitive tasks, I drive to work every day, eat, work and drive > home. I do these things automatically, and most of the time dont put a lot > of thought into them, I just follow the script. In the case of planning a > trip like that, we may not know the exact details, but we know the overview > of what to do, so we could take a script of travel planning, copy it, and > use it as a base template for acting. This doesn't sound bad, but you ignore the problem of representation. In what representational system do you express those scripts? How do you make sure that a system can effectively and efficiently express effective and efficient plans, procedures and actions in it (avoiding the autistic representational systems of expert systems)? And how can a system automatically generate such a representational system (recursively, so that it can stepwise abstract away from the sensory level)? And how does it know which representational system is relevant in a situation? Concept formation, how does it happen? > This does not remove the > combinatorial explosion search-planning problem of having an infinite > amount of choices for each action, but does give us a fall-back plan, if we > are pressed for time, or cannot find another solution currently. > > I am working in a small virtual world right now, and implementing a > simple set of tasks in a house environment. Another thought I am working on > is some kind of semi-supervised learning for the agents, and an interactive > method for defining actions and scripts. Interactive Method? Why should this be called AI? > It doesnt appear fruitful to > create an agent, define a huge set of actions, give it a goal, and expect > it to successfully achieve the goal, the search pattern just gets to large, > and it becomes concerned with an infinite variety of useless repetitive > choices. So, in other words, looking for an agi system is not very fruitful? > > After gathering a number of scripts an agent can then choose among the > scripts, or revert down to a higher-level set of actions it can perform. It doesn't seem to be very interesting, in the context of the agi mailing list. Arnoud ------- To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your subscription, please go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
