On 4/23/07, John G. Rose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
Adding some thoughts on AGI math - If the AGI or a sub processor of the AGI
is allotted time to "sleep" or idle process it could lazily postulate and
construct theorems with spare CPU cycles (cores are cheap nowadays), put
things together and use those theorems to further test the processing of
data structures and representations in new ways. When the AGI is first
started it could have the proof engine Mizar or Coq built in with a base set
of proofs. It could use existing theorems to operate over its data and it
can monitor the success and efficiency of the algorithms that it is using
but implicitly understand that more efficient methods are possible. The
This is part of "my point".
close mapping of mathematical structures and language to its existing
operational framework begets efficiency - if the internal language is
closely related to a mathematical language it is better IMHO. This is
probably not the case of existing AGI's perhaps there is a close mapping to
NL for NLP sake and for efficiency in "rolling it out" existing AGI's are
probably more hardcoded /hardwired.
It is not that internal language of AGIs is not mathematical (in the
sense of C-H isomorphism) because it is modeled on NL. Its use is to
build (statistically) models of the world. The knowledge of the world
needs to be heavily formalized before it can be fed to C-H.
Formalization comes as an advanced use of the language, high in the
dual network. My idea was to put CIC in there as a part of the body so
that an AGI could go beyond "counting on ten humanly fingers". The C-H
could kick-in when an AGI becomes a conscious programmer.
-----
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/?member_id=231415&user_secret=fabd7936
