Edward, It seems that Cassimatis architect his AGI system as an assembly of several modules. That's primary approach in designing any complex system. I agree with such module architecture approach, but my "path to AGI" statement was not exactly about such architecture.
My claim is that it's possible [and necessary] to split massive amount of work that has to be done for AGI into smaller narrow AI chunks in such a way that every narrow AI chunk has it's own business meaning and can pay for itself. That would guarantee that: - Successful AI researchers will be timely rewarded - Unsuccessful AI researchers (who cannot successfully deliver even one chunk of work) would lose their funding and would be forced to correct their approaches. Sunday, November 25, 2007, 5:22:46 PM, you wrote: > A few days ago there was some discussion on this list about the > potential usefulness of narrow AI to AGI. > > Nick Cassimatis, who is speaking at AGI 2008, has something he > calls Polyscheme which is described partially at the following AGIRI > link: http://www.agiri.org/workshop/Cassimatis.ppt > > It appears to use what are arguably narrow AI modules in a > coordinated manner to achieve AGI. ----- 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=69280599-c1e5da
