On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 10:00 PM, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- On Sun, 9/28/08, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Yes, the big weakness of the whole Cyc framework is learning. Their logic > engine seems to be pretty poor at incremental, experiential learning ... in > linguistics as in every other domain. > > > >I don't think they have a workable approach to NL understanding or > generation ... I was just pointing out that they *are* explicitly devoting a > lot of resources to the problem ... > > I agree. You need to build the language model first. And then you don't > need to build an inference engine and knowledge base because you already > have them. I don't agree fully with the above ... I believe one can create the language model, experiential-learning engine and inference engine together, so that the two are built to help each other ... and that hand-coded commonsense knowledge can potentially be helpful (though not necessary) in this context.... But, Cyc didn't do it this way, they began with a knowledge-store and a crisp inference engine only, and are now trying to graft other components onto this framework, which IMO isn't working very well... > But Cyc has too much invested to start over. The best we can do is urge > others (YKY) not to make the same mistake. > YKY feels he is doing something quite different than Cyc due to his use of fuzzy logic and a different knowledge format, but IMO these differences are not so dramatic, and his problem will run into the same problems Cyc has unless it changes strategy significantly... ben g ------------------------------------------- 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
