Actually, CPS doesn't mean solving problems without algorithms. CPS is itself
an algorithm, as described on pages 7-8 of Pei's paper. However, as I
mentioned, I would be more convinced if there were some experimental results
showing that it actually worked.
-- Matt Mahoney, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- On Thu, 9/18/08, Mike Tintner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From: Mike Tintner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [agi] Case-by-case Problem Solving (draft)
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Date: Thursday, September 18, 2008, 8:51 PM
Ben,
I'm only saying that CPS seems to be loosely
equivalent to wicked, ill-structured problem-solving, (the reference to
convergent/divergent (or crystallised vs fluid) etc is merely to point out a
common distinction in psychology between two kinds of intelligence that Pei
wasn't aware of in the past - which is actually loosely equivalent to the
distinction between narrow AI and general AI problemsolving).
In the end, what Pei is/isn't aware of in terms of
general knowledge, doesn't matter much - don't you think that his
attempt to do without algorithms IS v. important? And don't you think any
such attempt would be better off referring explicitly to the
literature on wicked, ill-structured problems?
I don't think that pointing all this out is silly
- this (a non-algorithmic approach to CPS/wicked/whatever) is by far
the most important thing currently being discussed here - and potentially, if
properly developed, revolutionary.. Worth getting excited about,
no?
(It would also be helpful BTW to discuss the
"wicked" literature because it actually has abundant examples of wicked
problems
- and those, you must admit, are rather hard to come by here ).
Ben: TITLE: Case-by-case Problem Solving (draft)
AUTHOR: Pei
Wang
....
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.
Mike, I have to say I find this mode of discussion fairly
silly..
Pei has a rather comprehensive knowledge of AI and a strong
knowledge of cog-sci as well. It is obviously not the case that he is
unaware of these terms and ideas you are referring to.
Obviously, what
he means by "case-by-case problem solving" is NOT the same as "nonprogrammed
decisionmaking" nor "divergent problem-solving."
In his paper, he is
presenting a point of view, not seeking to compare this point of view to the
whole corpus of literature and ideas that he has absorbed during his
lifetime.
I happen not to fully agree with Pei's thinking on these
topics (though I like much of it), but I know Pei well enough to know that
those. places where his thinking diverges from mine, are *not* due to
ignorance of the literature on his
part...
agi | Archives
| Modify
Your Subscription
-------------------------------------------
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
