The world can always be described by an arbitrarily large logical predicate. The world as it exists now is one world-state. If one clause in the predicate were changed, that would be another world state.
More complex world states need more clauses in the predicate to describe them (i.e. their space is larger). A world with one binary object is a two-state space. A world with two binary switches is a four-state space. A world with three ten-position switches is a 1000-state space. ----- Original Message ----- From: Benjamin Goertzel To: agi@v2.listbox.com Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 2:03 PM Subject: Re: [agi] Circular definitions of intelligence I guess I don't really understand your formalism, i.e. -- how you define a "world-state" ... do you mean a set of elementary world-states described by some logical predicate? -- how do you define the size of a world-state ... would it be the complexity of that predicate? thx ben On 4/27/07, Mark Waser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I don't like this so much, because two sets of world-states with equal measure (size) may have very different complexity... I don't believe so because "complex" world states are by definition larger since they have more variables to vary (and thus more points/states/variables). It is true that one "complex" world-state is equivalent to multiple "simple" world states, but this is just the behavior that I desire/expect for my definition. If you're sure that I'm wrong, please provide an example . . . . ----- Original Message ----- From: Benjamin Goertzel To: agi@v2.listbox.com Sent: Friday, April 27, 2007 12:50 PM Subject: Re: [agi] Circular definitions of intelligence On 4/27/07, Mark Waser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On 4/26/07, Richard Loosemore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Can you point to an objective definition that is clear about which >>> things are more intelligent than others, and which does not accidentally >>> include things that manifestly conflict with the commonsense definition >>> (by false negatives or false positives)? Wow. The silence was deafening after my last attempt . . . . How about if I rephrase slightly dufferently as: Intelligence is the size of the space containing all world-states that the entity can successfully reach minus the size of the space containing all world-states that the entity cannot successfully avoid. I don't like this so much, because two sets of world-states with equal measure (size) may have very different complexity... ben g -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/?& ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/?& ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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/?& ----- 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