There are plenty of areas related to AI where the "secret sauce" has been shown to be reasonably clever algorithms (but not anything of the hairiness of Tarjan's graph planarity alg., for example) with lots of brute force horsepower. The watershed in robot navigation caused by evidence-grid sensor fusion is an example. If you look at higher functions, something with the functionality of hardware associative memory is ENORMOUSLY useful, and a solid half of computer science is devoted to techniques which capture little bits of its functionality in specific cases.
So, if you're hoping to build an AI that will run on hardware with 0.1% the horsepower of the human brain, you'd better be packing some really ingenious algorithms and datastructures. However, I'll give much higher odds of your success when you can go with the straightforward ones. Josh On Thursday 31 May 2007 07:21:27 pm Russell Wallace wrote: > On 5/31/07, J. Andrew Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ... > > No one queues up with solutions to important computer science > > algorithms that no one has found a solution to before, otherwise they > > wouldn't be insurmountable limitations on implementation. > > > ... The idea that the bottleneck in > AGI was the discovery of "secret sauce" algorithms was excusable back in the > 80s. ...in practice the limiting factor is almost entirely in > putting the pieces together the right way, and hardly at all in missing any > particular piece. ----- 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=e9e40a7e
