On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 9:59 PM, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > PLN needs to make assumptions about node probability in this case; but >> > NARS >> > also makes assumptions, it's just that NARS's assumptions are more >> > deeply >> > hidden in the formalism... >> >> If you means assumptions like "insufficient knowledge and resources", >> you are right, but that is not at the same level as assumptions about >> the values of node probability. > > I mean assumptions like "symmetric treatment of intension and extension", > which are technical mathematical assumptions...
But they are still not assumptions about domain knowledge, like node probability. >> I guess my previous question was not clear enough: if the only domain >> knowledge PLN has is >> >> > Ben is an author of a book on AGI <tv1> >> > This dude is an author of a book on AGI <tv2> >> >> and >> >> > Ben is odd <tv1> >> > This dude is odd <tv2> >> >> Will the system derives anything? > > Yes, via making default assumptions about node probability... Then what are the conclusions, with their truth-values, in each of the two cases? Pei ------------------------------------------- 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
