Eric Baum wrote:
-- Assume there will be persistent objects in the 3D space
This is not innate. Babies don't recognize that when an object is
hidden from view that it still exists.
Ben> I'm extremely familiar with the literature on object permanence;
Ben> and the truth seems to
>> -- Assume there will be persistent objects in the 3D space
>>
>>
>> This is not innate. Babies don't recognize that when an object is
>> hidden from view that it still exists.
>>
>>
Ben> I'm extremely familiar with the literature on object permanence;
Ben> and the truth seems to be tha
Matt> This is not innate. Babies don't recognize that when an object
Matt> is hidden from view that it still exists.
As Ben pointed out, this is not quite right. Extremely young babies
display surprise when events are presented to them that would be
surprising once you know about objects.
How
-- Assume there will be persistent objects in the 3D space
This is not innate. Babies don't recognize that when an object is hidden from
view that it still exists.
I'm extremely familiar with the literature on object permanence; and the
truth seems to be that babies
**do** have s
--- Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, off-the-cuff, here are some biases that can be stated without
> reference to underlying machinery:
>
> -- Assume perceptual inputs refer to a 3D space
We don't really know if 3D models of space are innate or learned, and it would
be hard to do
Richard Loosemore wrote:
Ben,
I am not sure the question has been stated clearly enough to be
answered meaningfully, yet.
The list given by your correspondent was extremely vague: what does
it mean to talk about "an implicit set of constraints on ontologies
that can be discovered by system
On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 21:28:53 -0500, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Toward that end, it would be interesting to have a systematic list
somewhere of the genetic biases that are thought to be mostimportant for
structuring human cognition.
Does anyone know of a well-thought-out list of
On 14/02/07, Ben Goertzel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Does anyone know of a well-thought-out list of this sort. Of course I
could make one by surveying
the cognitive psych literature, but why reinvent the wheel?
None that I have come across. Biases that I have come across are
things like payin
Ben,
I am not sure the question has been stated clearly enough to be answered
meaningfully, yet.
The list given by your correspondent was extremely vague: what does it
mean to talk about "an implicit set of constraints on ontologies that
can be discovered by systematic 'scientific' investig
Matt Mahoney wrote:
I don't think there is a simple answer to this problem. We observe very
complex behavior in much simpler organisms that lack long term memory or the
ability to learn. For example, bees are born knowing how to fly, build hives,
gather food, and communicate its location.
February 13, 2007 9:28:53 PM
Subject: [agi] Enumeration of useful "genetic biases" for AGI
Hi,
In a recent offlist email dialogue with an AI researcher, he made the
following suggestion regarding the "inductive bias" that DNA supplies
to the human brain to aid it in learning:
*
Couldn't point you at anything systematic, but one good place to find biases
is looking at superstition and magic, where you find things like the illusion
of control, various tendencies to overanthropomorphize, causality attributed
to similarity and contagion, and so forth.
J
On Tuesday 13 Feb
Hi,
In a recent offlist email dialogue with an AI researcher, he made the
following suggestion regarding the "inductive bias" that DNA supplies
to the human brain to aid it in learning:
*
What is encoded in the DNA may include a starting ontology (as proposed,
with exasperating vaguess, by d
13 matches
Mail list logo
