"Symbol grounding" basically means the association of linguistic tokens (words, linguistic concepts, etc.) with nonlinguistic (e.g. perceptual-motor) patterns.
E.g. associating the word "apple" with a set of visual images of apples, or associating (some sense of) the word "from" with a set of remembered episodes illustrating that sense of "from-ness" ... Clearly human language learning relies to a large extent on these kinds of associations; a question is whether a software program could tractably learn language without such associations, by relying solely on statistical associations within texts. (Note the word "tractably" in the prior sentence -- I assume that given a sufficiently large corpus, language could be learned solely from statistical text analysis. But if "sufficiently large" means octillions of documents, that doesn't matter until we get access to the Galactic Empire's online library...) Cyc would be an example of an AGI project that is trying to get deep language understanding and general intelligence without any kind of symbol grounding. -- Ben G On 6/11/07, James Ratcliff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
1. Is anyone taking an approach to AGI without the use of Symbol Grounding? Or is that intrinsic in everyones approaches at this stage? (short of some Neural Network approaches) 2. How do you describe Symbol Grounding for an AGI? What do you consider the best ways to have the system get Symbol Grounding? James *Joshua Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>* wrote: Josh, Thanks for that answer on the layering of mind. > It's not that any existing level is wrong, but there aren't enough of them, so > that the higher ones aren't being built on the right primitives in current > systems. Word-level concepts in the mind are much more elastic and plastic > than logic tokens. Could I ask also that you take a stab at a psychological/sociological question: Why have not the leading minds of AI (considering for this purpose only the true creative thinkers with status in the community, however small a fraction that may be) taken a sufficiently multi-layered, grounded approach up to now? Isn't the need for grounding and deep-layering obvious to the most open-minded and intelligent of researchers? Joshua ------------------------------ 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/?&; _______________________________________ James Ratcliff - http://falazar.com Looking for something... ------------------------------ Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=47094/*http://farechase.yahoo.com/;_ylc=X3oDMTFicDJoNDllBF9TAzk3NDA3NTg5BHBvcwMxMwRzZWMDZ3JvdXBzBHNsawNlbWFpbC1uY20->with Yahoo! FareChase. ------------------------------ 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=e9e40a7e
