On 10/4/07, Edward W. Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Josh, > > (Talking of "breaking the small hardware mindset," thank god for the company > with the largest hardware mindset -- or at least the largest physical > embodiment of one-- Google. Without them I wouldn't have known what "FARG" > meant, and would have had to either (1) read your valuable response with > less than the understanding it deserves or (2) embarrassed myself by > admitting ignorance and asking for a clarification.) > > With regard to your answer, copied below, I thought the answer would be > something like that. > > So which of the below types of "representational problems" are the reasons > why their basic approach is not automatically extendable? > > > 1. They have no general purpose representation that can represent almost > anything in a sufficiently uniform representational scheme to let their > analogy net matching algorithm be universally applied without requiring > custom patches for each new type of thing to be represented. > > 2. They have no general purpose mechanism for determining what are relevant > similarities and generalities across which to allow slippage for purposes of > analogy. > > 3. They have no general purpose mechanism for automatically finding which > compositional patterns map to which lower level representations, and which > of those compositional patterns are similar to each other in a way > appropriate for slippages. > > 4. They have no general purpose mechanism for automatically determining what > would be appropriately coordinated slippages in semantic hyperspace. > > 5. Some reason not listed above. > > I don't know the answer. There is no reason why you should. But if you -- > or any other interested reader – do, or if you have any good thoughts on > the subject, please tell me.
I guess I do know more on this topic, but it is a long story for which I don't have the time to tell. Hopefully the following paper can answer some of the questions: A logic of categorization Pei Wang and Douglas Hofstadter Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, Vol.18, No.2, Pages 193-213, 2006 Pei > I may be naïve. I may be overly big-hardware optimistic. But based on the > architecture I have in mind, I think a Novamente-type system, if it is not > already architected to do so, could be modified to handle all of these > problems (except perhaps 5, if there is a 5) and, thus, provide powerful > analogy drawing across virtually all domains. > > Edward W. Porter > Porter & Associates > 24 String Bridge S12 > Exeter, NH 03833 > (617) 494-1722 > Fax (617) 494-1822 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: J Storrs Hall, PhD [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 1:44 PM > To: agi@v2.listbox.com > Subject: Re: [agi] breaking the small hardware mindset > > > > On Thursday 04 October 2007 10:56:59 am, Edward W. Porter wrote: > > You appear to know more on the subject of current analogy drawing > > research than me. So could you please explain to me what are the major > > current problems people are having in trying figure out how to draw > > analogies using a structure mapping approach that has a mechanism for > > coordinating similarity slippage, an approach somewhat similar to > > Hofstadter approach in Copycat? > > > Lets say we want a system that could draw analogies in real time when > > generating natural language output at the level people can, assuming > > there is some roughly semantic-net like representation of world > > knowledge, and lets say we have roughly brain level hardware, what > > ever that is. What are the current major problems? > > The big problem is that structure mapping is brittlely dependent on > representation, as Hofstadter complains; but that the FARG school hasn't > really come up with a generative theory (every Copycat-like analogizer > requires a pile of human-written Codelets which increases linearly with the > knowledge base -- and thus there is a real problem building a Copycat that > can learn its concepts). > > In my humble opinion, of course. > > Josh > > ----- > 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=8660244&id_secret=50073913-f918fd
