On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 3:06 AM, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Prolog is not fast, it is painfully slow for complex inferences due to using
> backtracking as a control mechanism
>
> The time-complexity issue that matters for inference engines is
> inference-control ... i.e. dampening
I'm in the process of reading this paper:
http://www.jair.org/papers/paper1410.html
It might answer a couple of your questions. And, it looks like it has
an interesting proposal about generating heuristics from the problem
description. The setting is boolean rather than firs-order. It
discusses t
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 6:59 PM, Abram Demski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm in the process of reading this paper:
>
> http://www.jair.org/papers/paper1410.html
>
> It might answer a couple of your questions. And, it looks like it has
> an interesting proposal about generating heuristics from the
PLN can do inference on crisp-truth-valued statements ... and on this
subset, it's equivalent to ordinary predicate logic ...
About resolution and inference: resolution is a single inference step. To
make a theorem-prover, you must couple resolution with some search
strategy. For a search strate
No transfer? This paper suggests otherwise:
http://www.cs.washington.edu/homes/pedrod/papers/aaai06b.pdf
-Abram Demski
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 7:31 AM, YKY (Yan King Yin)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 6:59 PM, Abram Demski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I'm in the process o
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 9:00 PM, Abram Demski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No transfer? This paper suggests otherwise:
>
> http://www.cs.washington.edu/homes/pedrod/papers/aaai06b.pdf
Well, people know that propositional SAT is fast, so
propositionalization is a tempting heuristic, but as the pape
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 9:00 PM, Abram Demski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> No transfer? This paper suggests otherwise:
>>
>> http://www.cs.washington.edu/homes/pedrod/papers/aaai06b.pdf
Sorry, I replied too quickly...
This paper does contribute to solving FOL inference problems, but it
is still inad
Eric,
I have a fuzzy recollection that he might have open source code of some
sort, either from the Googletech talk, from his web page, or form one of the
two articles of his I read on the subject months ago. But I don't know for
sure.
Check these sources out, and if they don't answer the questi
--- On Mon, 9/22/08, Steve Richfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>My proposal: Much like the "College of Science" at nearly all univesities was
>subsequently chopped up into freestanding departments like Physics, Chemistry,
>Biology, etc., so now CS departments need to be chopped up, at minimum t
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 9:20 PM, YKY (Yan King Yin)
> Sorry, I replied too quickly...
>
> This paper does contribute to solving FOL inference problems, but it
> is still inadequate for AGI because the FOL is required to be
> function-free. If you remember programming in Prolog, we often use
> func
--- On Mon, 9/22/08, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://goertzel.org/agiq.pdf
Some of the problems you describe in intelligence testing also apply to data
compression testing. For example, an AI could "cheat" by being tuned with the
knowledge needed to pass a specific test. This i
I don't know prolog's "functors". But, I agree that the approach is
fundamentally limited, because it is restricted to finite domains.
-Abram Demski
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 9:20 AM, YKY (Yan King Yin)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 9:00 PM, Abram Demski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I am trying to recover an old GMail account right now, and I agree.
On 9/23/08, Matt Mahoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- On Mon, 9/22/08, Steve Richfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>My proposal: Much like the "College of Science" at nearly all univesities
>> was subsequently chopped up int
Abram,
Can your approach gives the Confidence measurement a probabilistic
interpretation? It is what really differs NARS from the other
approaches.
Pei
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 11:22 PM, Abram Demski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> This example also shows why NARS and PLN are similar on deduction,
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 10:09 PM, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> One interesting observation is that these truth values approximate
> relatively
> uninformative points on the probability distributions that PLN would attach
> to these relationships.
>
> That is, <1.0;0.45> , if interpre
Note that formally, the
c = n/(n+k)
equation also exists in the math of the beta distribution, which is used
in Walley's imprecise probability theory and also in PLN's indefinite
probabilities...
So there seems some hope of making such a correspondence, based on
algebraic evidence...
ben
On Tu
> > Yes. One of my biggest practical complaints with NARS is that the
> induction
> > and abduction truth value formulas don't make that much sense to me.
>
> I guess since you are trained as a mathematician, your "sense" has
> been formalized by probability theory to some extent. ;-)
>
Actually,
Yes, I know them, though I don't like any of them that I've seen. I
wonder Abram can find something better.
To tell you the truth, my whole idea of confidence actually came from
a probabilistic formula, after my re-interpretation of it.
Pei
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 4:35 PM, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL P
Wow! I did not mean to stir up such an argument between you two!!
Pei,
What if instead of using "node probability", the knowledge that "wrote
an AGI book" is rare was inserted as a low frequency (high confidence)
truth value on "human" => "wrote an AGI book"? Could NARS use that to
do what Ben wa
So can *you* understand credit default swaps?
"Here's the scary part of today's testimony everyone seems to have missed:
SEC chairman Chris Cox's statement that the Credit Default Swap (CDS) market
is "completely unregulated." It's size? Somewhere in the $50 TRILLION
range."
-
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 5:28 PM, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> > Yes. One of my biggest practical complaints with NARS is that the
>> > induction
>> > and abduction truth value formulas don't make that much sense to me.
>>
>> I guess since you are trained as a mathematician, your "s
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 7:26 PM, Abram Demski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wow! I did not mean to stir up such an argument between you two!!
Abram: This argument has been going on for about 10 years, with some
"on" periods and "off" periods, so don't feel responsible for it ---
you just raised the
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 7:48 PM, Mike Tintner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> So can *you* understand credit default swaps?
>
Yes I can, having a PhD in math and having studied a moderate amount of
mathematical finance ...
But, in a couple decades an AGI will surely understand them (and more
compli
> > 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 a
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 9:28 PM, Pei Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 7:26 PM, Abram Demski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Wow! I did not mean to stir up such an argument between you two!!
>
> Abram: This argument has been going on for about 10 years, with some
> "on" pe
> I think it's mathematically and conceptually clear that for a system with
> unbounded
> resources probability theory is the right way to reason. However if you
> look
> at Cox's axioms
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cox%27s_theorem
>
> you'll see that the third one (consistency) cannot reason
Ben,
Are CDS significantly complicated then - as an awful lot of professional,
highly intelligent people are claiming?
So can *you* understand credit default swaps?
Yes I can, having a PhD in math and having studied a moderate amount of
mathematical finance ...
-
http://www.rooshv.com/2008/credit-default-swaps-for-dummies
Mike Tintner wrote:
So can *you* understand credit default swaps?
"Here's the scary part of today's testimony everyone seems to have
missed: SEC chairman Chris Cox's statement that the Credit Default
Swap (CDS) market is "completely
The difficult part is not understanding what credit default swaps are, but
figuring out how to *value* them.
This involves complex math which can only be done via computer simulations
and numerical-analysis calculations ... and experts don't really agree on
the right assumptions to make in doing t
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 1:55 PM, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The financial world has not yet gone through the process of
> agreeing on how to value these financial instruments in a global economic
> regime like this one
Agreeing on prices eh? That sounds just great :)
Trent
-
30 matches
Mail list logo
