Mike Tintner wrote:
Charles H:as I understand it, this still wouldn't be an AGI, but merely a
categorizer.
That's my understanding too. There does seem to be a general problem
in the field of AGI, distinguishing AGI from narrow AI -
philosophically. In fact, I don't think I've seen any definition of
AGI or intelligence that does.
-----
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/?&;
But *do* notice that the terminal nodes are uninterpreted. This means
that they could be assigned, e.g., procedural values.
Because of this, even though the current design (as I understand it) of
NARS is purely a categorizer, it's not limited in what it's extensions
and embedding environment can be. It would be a trivial extension to
allow terminal nodes to have a type, and that what was done when a
terminal node was generated could depend upon that type.
(There's a paper called "wang.roadmap.pdf" that I *must* get around to
reading!)
P.S.: In the paper on computations it seems to me that items of high
durability should not be dropped from the processing queue even if it
becomes full of higher priority tasks. There should probably be a
"postponed tasks" location where things like garbage collection and
database sanity checking and repair can be saved to be done during
future idle times.
-----
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=52084316-6120bf
