Call me GOFAI ;) I have thought about this for quite some time and I'm not just copying old ideas
On 1/19/07, Benjamin Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The key problem is that you can't feasibly encode enough facts to allow interesting commonsense inferences
Yes, we need a lot of thought rules -- they are needed, and there is no escape except to encode them. Machine learning may help (the rules can be learned), but I think human encoding can get us quite far already. That's why I want to start a project to collect such rules.
-- commonsense inference seems to require a very massive store of highly uncertain knowledge-items, rather than a small store of certain ones.
Totally disagree! I actually examined a few cases of *real-life* commonsense inference steps, and I found that they are based on a *small* number of tiny rules of thought. I don't know why you think "massive" knowledge items are needed for commonsense reasoning -- if you closely examine some of your own thoughts you'd see. The rules in my system need not be "certain". They can be *defeasible* and augmented with Pei Wang's <c,f> (confidence and frequency) values (which I think is a very good idea).
I feel like you are personally rediscovering GOFAI, the kind of AI that I read about in textbooks when I first started exploring the field in the early 1980's!!!!
Indeed I am very much influenced by those books. That's not necessarily a bad thing!! YKY ----- 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/?list_id=303
