Re: [agi] [Science Daily] Our Unconscious Brain Makes The Best Decisions Possible

2009-01-02 Thread Jim Bromer
On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 11:12 AM, Jim Bromer  wrote:

>> If extensive tests showed that people overwhelmingly made judgments
>> that were Bayesianesque then this conjecture would be important.  The
>> problem is, that since the numerous possible influences of previous
>> learning has to be ruled out, I would suspect that any test for
>> Bayesian-like reasoning would have to be kept so simple that it would
>> not add anything new to our knowledge.
>>
>> If judgment was that simple most of the programmers in this list would
>> have really great AGI programs by now, because simple weighted
>> decision making is really easy to program.  The problem occurs when
>> you realize that it is just not that easy.
>>
>> I think Anderson was the first to advocate weighted decision making in
>> AI and my recollection is that he was writing his theories back in the
>> 1970's.
>>
>> Jim Bromer
>
> One other thing.  My interest in studies of cognitive science is how
> the results of some study might be related to advanced AI, what is
> called AGI in this group.  The use of weighted reasoning seems
> attractive and if these kinds of methods do actually conform to some
> cognitive processes then that would be a tremendous justification for
> their use in AGI projects - along with other methods that would be
> necessary to actually simulate or produce conceptually integrated
> judgement.
>
> But, one of the major design problems with tests that use statistical
> methods to demonstrate that some cognitive function of reasoning seems
> to conform with statistical processes is that since the artifacts of
> the statistical method itself may obscure the results, the design of
> the sample has to be called into question and the proposition
> restudied using other design models capable of accounting for possible
> sources of artifact error.
> Jim Bromer
>

I did not mean to direct this criticism at any one study or any one
person.  Not only can the design of a study be questioned on the basis
of whether or not the question tends to lead to the kind of results
that the study purports to show, but the methods of the analysis can
also leave artifacts or other subtle influences on the results as
well.  This not only goes for statistical studies, but could be found
in logical studies, numerical studies, linguistic studies, image-based
studies and so on.  Ok, this isn't news but some people haven't
learned it in yet.
Jim Bromer


---
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=123753653-47f84b
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com


Re: [agi] [Science Daily] Our Unconscious Brain Makes The Best Decisions Possible

2009-01-02 Thread Jim Bromer
On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 3:05 PM, Jim Bromer  wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 4:02 PM, Richard Loosemore  wrote:
>>  My friend Mike Oaksford in the UK has written several
>> papers giving a higher level cognitive theory that says that people are, in
>> fact, doing something like bayesian estimation when then make judgments.  In
>> fact, people are very good at being bayesians, contra the loud protests of
>> the I Am A Bayesian Rationalist crowd, who think they were the first to do
>> it.
>> Richard Loosemore
>
> That sounds like an easy hypothesis to test.  Except for a problem.
> Previous learning would be relevant to the solving of the problems and
> would produce results that could not be totally accounted for.
> Complexity, in the complicated sense of the term, is relevant to this
> problem, both in the complexity of how previous learning that might
> influence decision making and the possible (likely) complexity of the
> process of judgment itself.
>
> If extensive tests showed that people overwhelmingly made judgments
> that were Bayesianesque then this conjecture would be important.  The
> problem is, that since the numerous possible influences of previous
> learning has to be ruled out, I would suspect that any test for
> Bayesian-like reasoning would have to be kept so simple that it would
> not add anything new to our knowledge.
>
> If judgment was that simple most of the programmers in this list would
> have really great AGI programs by now, because simple weighted
> decision making is really easy to program.  The problem occurs when
> you realize that it is just not that easy.
>
> I think Anderson was the first to advocate weighted decision making in
> AI and my recollection is that he was writing his theories back in the
> 1970's.
>
> Jim Bromer

One other thing.  My interest in studies of cognitive science is how
the results of some study might be related to advanced AI, what is
called AGI in this group.  The use of weighted reasoning seems
attractive and if these kinds of methods do actually conform to some
cognitive processes then that would be a tremendous justification for
their use in AGI projects - along with other methods that would be
necessary to actually simulate or produce conceptually integrated
judgement.

But, one of the major design problems with tests that use statistical
methods to demonstrate that some cognitive function of reasoning seems
to conform with statistical processes is that since the artifacts of
the statistical method itself may obscure the results, the design of
the sample has to be called into question and the proposition
restudied using other design models capable of accounting for possible
sources of artifact error.
Jim Bromer


---
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=123753653-47f84b
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com


Re: [agi] [Science Daily] Our Unconscious Brain Makes The Best Decisions Possible

2009-01-01 Thread Richard Loosemore

Jim Bromer wrote:

On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 4:02 PM, Richard Loosemore  wrote:

 My friend Mike Oaksford in the UK has written several
papers giving a higher level cognitive theory that says that people are, in
fact, doing something like bayesian estimation when then make judgments.  In
fact, people are very good at being bayesians, contra the loud protests of
the I Am A Bayesian Rationalist crowd, who think they were the first to do
it.
Richard Loosemore


That sounds like an easy hypothesis to test.  Except for a problem.
Previous learning would be relevant to the solving of the problems and
would produce results that could not be totally accounted for.
Complexity, in the complicated sense of the term, is relevant to this
problem, both in the complexity of how previous learning that might
influence decision making and the possible (likely) complexity of the
process of judgment itself.

If extensive tests showed that people overwhelmingly made judgments
that were Bayesianesque then this conjecture would be important.  The
problem is, that since the numerous possible influences of previous
learning has to be ruled out, I would suspect that any test for
Bayesian-like reasoning would have to be kept so simple that it would
not add anything new to our knowledge.


Uh... you have to actually read the research to know how they came to 
these conclusions.


Take it from me, they are mite bit ahead of you on this one :-).



Richard Loosemore





---
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=123753653-47f84b
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com


Re: [agi] [Science Daily] Our Unconscious Brain Makes The Best Decisions Possible

2009-01-01 Thread Jim Bromer
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 4:02 PM, Richard Loosemore  wrote:
>  My friend Mike Oaksford in the UK has written several
> papers giving a higher level cognitive theory that says that people are, in
> fact, doing something like bayesian estimation when then make judgments.  In
> fact, people are very good at being bayesians, contra the loud protests of
> the I Am A Bayesian Rationalist crowd, who think they were the first to do
> it.
> Richard Loosemore

That sounds like an easy hypothesis to test.  Except for a problem.
Previous learning would be relevant to the solving of the problems and
would produce results that could not be totally accounted for.
Complexity, in the complicated sense of the term, is relevant to this
problem, both in the complexity of how previous learning that might
influence decision making and the possible (likely) complexity of the
process of judgment itself.

If extensive tests showed that people overwhelmingly made judgments
that were Bayesianesque then this conjecture would be important.  The
problem is, that since the numerous possible influences of previous
learning has to be ruled out, I would suspect that any test for
Bayesian-like reasoning would have to be kept so simple that it would
not add anything new to our knowledge.

If judgment was that simple most of the programmers in this list would
have really great AGI programs by now, because simple weighted
decision making is really easy to program.  The problem occurs when
you realize that it is just not that easy.

I think Anderson was the first to advocate weighted decision making in
AI and my recollection is that he was writing his theories back in the
1970's.

Jim Bromer


---
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=123753653-47f84b
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com


Re: [agi] [Science Daily] Our Unconscious Brain Makes The Best Decisions Possible

2008-12-30 Thread Vladimir Nesov
On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 12:44 AM, Kaj Sotala  wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 10:15 PM, Lukasz Stafiniak  wrote:
>> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081224215542.htm
>>
>> Nothing surprising ;-)
>
> So they have a result saying that we're good at subconsciously
> estimating the direction in which dots on a screen are moving in.
> Apparently this can be safely generalized into "Our Unconscious Brain
> Makes The Best Decisions Possible (implied: "always")".
>
> You're right, nothing surprising. Just the kind of unfounded,
> simplistic hyperbole I'd expect from your average science reporter.
> ;-)
>

Here is a critique of the article:

http://neurocritic.blogspot.com/2008/12/deal-no-deal-or-dots.html

-- 
Vladimir Nesov
robot...@gmail.com
http://causalityrelay.wordpress.com/


---
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=123753653-47f84b
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com


Re: [agi] [Science Daily] Our Unconscious Brain Makes The Best Decisions Possible

2008-12-29 Thread Matt Mahoney
--- On Mon, 12/29/08, Richard Loosemore  wrote:

> 8-) Don't say that too loudly, Yudkowsky might hear
> you. :-)
...
> When I suggested that someone go check some of his ravings
> with an outside authority, he banned me from his discussion
> list.

Yudkowsky's side of the story might be of interest...

http://www.sl4.org/archive/0608/15895.html
http://www.sl4.org/archive/0608/15928.html

-- Matt Mahoney, matmaho...@yahoo.com


> From: Richard Loosemore 
> Subject: Re: [agi] [Science Daily] Our Unconscious Brain Makes The Best 
> Decisions Possible
> To: agi@v2.listbox.com
> Date: Monday, December 29, 2008, 4:02 PM
> Lukasz Stafiniak wrote:
> >
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081224215542.htm
> > 
> > Nothing surprising ;-)
> 
> Nothing surprising?!!
> 
> 8-) Don't say that too loudly, Yudkowsky might hear
> you. :-)
> 
> The article is a bit naughty when it says, of Tversky and
> Kahnemann, that "...this has become conventional wisdom
> among cognition researchers."  Actually, the original
> facts were interpreted in a variety of ways, some of which
> strongly disagreed with T & K's original
> intepretation, just like this one you reference above.  The
> only thing that is conventional wisdom is that the topic
> exists, and is the subject of dispute.
> 
> And, as many people know, I made the mistake of challenging
> Yudkowsky on precisely this subject back in 2006, when he
> wrote an essay strongly advocating T&K's original
> intepretation.  Yudkowsky went completely berserk, accused
> me of being an idiot, having no brain, not reading any of
> the literature, never answering questions, and generally
> being something unspeakably worse than a slime-oozing crank.
>  He literally wrote an essay denouncing me as equivalent to
> a flat-earth believing crackpot.
> 
> When I suggested that someone go check some of his ravings
> with an outside authority, he banned me from his discussion
> list.
> 
> Ah, such are the joys of being speaking truth to power(ful
> idiots).
> 
> ;-)
> 
> As far as this research goes, it sits somewhere down at the
> lower end of the available theories.  My friend Mike
> Oaksford in the UK has written several papers giving a
> higher level cognitive theory that says that people are, in
> fact, doing something like bayesian estimation when then
> make judgments.  In fact, people are very good at being
> bayesians, contra the loud protests of the I Am A Bayesian
> Rationalist crowd, who think they were the first to do it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Richard Loosemore



---
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=123753653-47f84b
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com


Re: [agi] [Science Daily] Our Unconscious Brain Makes The Best Decisions Possible

2008-12-29 Thread Kaj Sotala
On Mon, Dec 29, 2008 at 10:15 PM, Lukasz Stafiniak  wrote:
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081224215542.htm
>
> Nothing surprising ;-)

So they have a result saying that we're good at subconsciously
estimating the direction in which dots on a screen are moving in.
Apparently this can be safely generalized into "Our Unconscious Brain
Makes The Best Decisions Possible (implied: "always")".

You're right, nothing surprising. Just the kind of unfounded,
simplistic hyperbole I'd expect from your average science reporter.
;-)


---
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=123753653-47f84b
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com


Re: [agi] [Science Daily] Our Unconscious Brain Makes The Best Decisions Possible

2008-12-29 Thread Richard Loosemore

Lukasz Stafiniak wrote:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081224215542.htm

Nothing surprising ;-)


Nothing surprising?!!

8-) Don't say that too loudly, Yudkowsky might hear you. :-)

The article is a bit naughty when it says, of Tversky and Kahnemann, 
that "...this has become conventional wisdom among cognition 
researchers."  Actually, the original facts were interpreted in a 
variety of ways, some of which strongly disagreed with T & K's original 
intepretation, just like this one you reference above.  The only thing 
that is conventional wisdom is that the topic exists, and is the subject 
of dispute.


And, as many people know, I made the mistake of challenging Yudkowsky on 
precisely this subject back in 2006, when he wrote an essay strongly 
advocating T&K's original intepretation.  Yudkowsky went completely 
berserk, accused me of being an idiot, having no brain, not reading any 
of the literature, never answering questions, and generally being 
something unspeakably worse than a slime-oozing crank.  He literally 
wrote an essay denouncing me as equivalent to a flat-earth believing 
crackpot.


When I suggested that someone go check some of his ravings with an 
outside authority, he banned me from his discussion list.


Ah, such are the joys of being speaking truth to power(ful idiots).

;-)

As far as this research goes, it sits somewhere down at the lower end of 
the available theories.  My friend Mike Oaksford in the UK has written 
several papers giving a higher level cognitive theory that says that 
people are, in fact, doing something like bayesian estimation when then 
make judgments.  In fact, people are very good at being bayesians, 
contra the loud protests of the I Am A Bayesian Rationalist crowd, who 
think they were the first to do it.






Richard Loosemore



---
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=123753653-47f84b
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com