To: | ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
---|---|
From: | FERENC KOVACS <f.kovacs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Sat, 23 Jan 2010 10:11:25 +0000 (GMT) |
Message-id: | <307607.16344.qm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Rob, Chris,
It is nice to read that AI representatives have their own paradigm of the limits of computability and undecideability, surely a highly technical formulation of a very simple problem common to everyday experience. It is basically about handling identity (specifics) amongst multitudes (generics). The solution was invented when numbers were invented and used as tags. The world of numbers aka number systems were used then to find a hit or a match. If a tagged item and a number in our head was paired as a hit, there was no more to do. You found what you wanted. If there were more of that identifier, you shifted and looked among the next level further until the next hit, etc. When you have identified a whole sequence (populace), you had a Match, no need to look further. This applies to objects and properties as well in profiling. The more properties of a suspect you know, the more likely to find/locate him/her. He or she may even be a class of himself/herself. With a long long list of features – with time and space parameters as final marks about his/her whereabouts in reality. To be able to match the search profile, you must have a template that is suitable for the purpose in the realiyt of a computer. With numbers there are no problems, you learn to count and numerate, and it is a built in procedure in your mind. With words or verbal signs it is different. They are not sorted in your mind in a similar (stepwise, discrete, ascending or descending) fashion. Therefore they need to be transformed, just as any other input, such as the skyline of a landscape to direct your rockets to a target on the basis of comparison of radar info in the fly, with a full match of the route leading there. Ferenc _________________________________________________________________ Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/ Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/ Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/ Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (01) |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Can Syntax become Semantic ?, Rob Freeman |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] rant on pseudoscience, ravi sharma |
Previous by Thread: | [ontolog-forum] Commonsense and NMR for future ontologists, Paola Di Maio |
Next by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Can Syntax be Semantic?, Christopher Menzel |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |