Richard Loosemore wrote:
Mike Tintner wrote:
Eh? Move your hand across the desk. You see that as a series of
snapshots? Move a noisy object across. You don't see a continuous
picture with a continuous soundtrack?
Let me give you an example of how impressive I think the brain's
powers here are. I've been thinking about metaphor and the
superimposition/ transformation of two images involved. "The clouds
cried" - that sort of thing. Then another one came up: "bicycle
kick." Now technically, I think that's awesome - because to arrive at
it, the brain has to superimpose two *movie* clips.
Look at the football kick:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3NCWQr47bK0
and then look at the action of cycling. (In fact that superimposition
of clouds and eyes crying is also of movie clips - and so are a vast
amount of metaphors - but I hadn't really noticed it).
Try and tell me how current visual systems might make that connection.
And I would assert - and am increasingly confident - that the grammar
of language - how we put words together in whatever form - is based
on cutting together internal *movies* in our head - not still
images,but movies.
They don't teach moviemaking in AI courses do they?
Mike,
There is a pattern in our attacks, and within that pattern there is a
fallacy that I don't think you are aware of.
What you are doing is saying that to understand visual (or other)
images, or more generally to understand sequences like sequences of
words in a sentence, the mind MUST replay these on some internal
viewing screen.
You go one further than this: you are arguing that because AI
theorists do not put "continuous replay" mechanisms inside their
models, therefore those theorists are completely failing to get to
grips with the issue of handling images, or handling moving sequences
or strings of sounds.
In other words, from your point of view NO INTERNAL DISPLAY SCREEN
means that the AI model contains no way to understand these things.
Hence your frequent complaint that AI people just don't have a clue
how to deal with imagery, or that they don't understand that the mind
"works directly in terms of imagery, not in terms of symbols".
But (with respect) this is just nonsense, and it has known to be
nonsense for a long time. If your AI has an internal display screen
on which images are displayed or replayed, you have achieved nothing,
unless there is a smaller AI watching the screen - so this is a
version of the homunculus fallacy.
Unless you are prepared to say WHY the screen is needed at all, and
what happens after the image is displayed on that internal screen, you
are just making nonsensical protests about a non-problem.
The truth is that images are broken down and understood in the act of
being broken down.
Understanding is not a replay of sensory input!
Richard Loosemore
P.S. I made movies when I was a student at UCL.
OK, perhaps thusly:
The AI "sees" a scent and pushes it to an internal "screen buffer" that
mimics what was seen. (I say pushes, because the previous screen buffer
isn't lost, but is pushed back one layer.)
Then the two buffers are XORed and the result is saved to a changes
buffer. This gives a "moving image" section which is much smaller to
process. Now search this for "objects" that have altered position. Use
this to calculate distances, approach, flee, etc. Also to highlight any
new features that need processing to determine object status.
But I think a lot of this is done before the signal ever gets to the
visual cortex. OTOH, there's pretty good evidence that outlines, at
least, are present in the visual cortex laid out in a manner spatially
similar to their occurrence on the retina. I suspect that this is used
for coordination of various different processes that pull their visual
feeds at an earlier step.
N.B.: I don't see why this would be inherently necessary for
intelligence, but I suspect that it's a part of *OUR* intelligence. We
evolved as highly visually oriented animals in the grossly three
dimensional world of the jungle canopy. It's only in the later stages
that we descended from the trees and started to be able to "stand on our
own two feet"...freeing our hands for other purposes.
-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription:
http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=95818715-a78a9b
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
