Matt, I totally agree with you on Cyc and LISP. To go further, I think Cyc
is a dead end because of the assumption that intelligence is dependent on a
vast store of knowledge, basically represented in a semantic net.
Intelligence should start with the learning of simple patterns in images and
some kind of language that can refer to them and their observed behavior.
And this involves the training you are talking about.
But you don't quite understand the difference between a natural-like formal
language and something like LISP. I'm talking about a language that has
formal syntax but most importantly has the full expressive power of a
natural language (minus the idioms and aesthetic elements like poetry).
Now the training of such a system is the problem, and that's the problem
that we're all working on. I am just about finished with the parsing of my
language, Jinnteera (in ANSI/ISO C++). I have bitmaps coming in from
clients to the intelligence engine and some image processing. The next step
is the semantic processing of the parse tree of incoming statements. This
system, in no way, has any intelligence yet, but it provides the initial
framework for experimentation and the developement of AI, using any internal
intelligence algorithms of choice.
It's basically an AI shell at the moment, and after some more development
and polishing, I'm willing to share it with anyone whose interested.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Matt Mahoney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <agi@v2.listbox.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2006 9:03 PM
Subject: Re: [agi] Natural versus formal AI interface languages
Artificial languages that remove ambiguity like Lojban do not bring us any
closer to solving the AI problem. It is straightforward to convert between
artificial languages and structured knowledge (e.g first order logic), but
it is still a hard (AI complete) problem to convert between natural and
artificial languages. If you could translate English -> Lojban -> English,
then you could just as well translate, e.g. English -> Lojban -> Russian.
Without a natural language model, you have no access to the vast knowledge
base of the Internet, or most of the human race. I know people can learn
Lojban, just like they can learn Cycl or LISP. Lets not repeat these
mistakes. This is not training, it is programming a knowledge base. This
is narrow AI.
-- Matt Mahoney, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
