TITLE: Case-by-case Problem Solving (draft)
AUTHOR: Pei Wang
ABSTRACT: Case-by-case Problem Solving is an approach in which the
system solves the current occurrence of a problem instance by taking
the available knowledge into consideration, under the restriction of
available resources. It is different from the traditional Algorithmic
Problem Solving in which the system applies a given algorithm to each
problem instance. Case-by-case Problem Solving is suitable for
situations where the system has no applicable algorithm for a problem.
This approach gives the system flexibility, originality, and
scalability, at the cost of predictability. This paper introduces the
basic notion of case-by-case problem solving, as well as its most
recent implementation in NARS, an AGI project.
Philosophically, this is v. interesting and seems to be breaking important
ground. It's moving in the direction I've long been urging - get rid of
algorithms; they just don't apply to GI problems.
But you seem to be reinventing the term for wheel. There is an extensive
literature, including AI stuff, on "wicked, ill-structured" problems, (and
even "nonprogrammed decisionmaking" which won't, I suggest, be replaced by
"case-by-case PS". These are well-established terms. You similarly seemed
to be unaware of the v. common distinction between convergent & divergent
problem-solving.
As usual, you don't give examples of problems that you're applying your
method to .
Consequently, it's difficult to know how to interpret:
"Do not define a "problem" as a class and use the same method to solve all
of its
instances. Instead, treat each "problem instance" as a "problem" on its own,
and
solve it in a case-by-case manner, according to the current
(knowledge/resource)
situation in the system."
I would argue that you *must* define every problem, however wicked, as a
class, even if only v. roughly, in order to be able to solve it at all. If,
for example, the problem is how to physically explore a totally new kind of
territory, you must know that it involves some kind of exploration/travel.
But you may then have to radically redefine travel - from say walking to
swimming/ crawling/ swinging on vines etc. etc. or walking with one foot up,
one foot on the level.
Typically, some form of creative particular example of the general kind of
problem-and-solution may be required - e.g. a strange form of
walking/crawling. I would v. much like to know how you propose that logic
can achieve that.
-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription:
https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=114414975-3c8e69
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
