[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Monica Anderson on AGI

To: Ali Hashemi <ali@xxxxxxxxx>, "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Duane Nickull <dnickull@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 19:43:21 -0700
Message-id: <C9BE7E59.16F8B%dnickull@xxxxxxxxx>
Agreed.  My intent is not to pass judgment that emotions are not as good as a more Spock/Vulcan approach.  Just to note that they are two systems which may compete in terms of course of action.  Computational Intelligence must somehow allow the development of some of these hypothesis to reach an advanced stage in order to truly grasp the ramifications or potential.  Narrowly scoping inference results at an early stage may lead to failure to the realization of such potential.

Researchers and implementers must also balance the potential for exponential growth of hypothesis if all hypothesis are left totally unchecked.  This can easily happen when using the Blackboard AI pattern in the absence of a feedback loop.  In speech recognition or multi-tap mobile (number to text) software, it is relatively easy to apply grammar rules to weigh higher on linear sentence potential.  In the absence of such feedback, a more complex set of hypothesis are harder to develop to a point where the hypothesis are weighed.

My belief is that humans develop intuition which allows people to sort tuples based on a combination of instinct and experience patterns.  Bestowing such reasoning powers on computational intelligence agents is highly problematic for any developer.

Duane Nickull
“First things first, but not necessarily in that order”  Dr. Who

On 4/3/11 7:04 PM, "Ali Hashemi" <ali@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

John, thanks for the links and extra background, much appreciated.


On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Duane Nickull <dnickull@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
 At a basic level, emotions may outweigh logic.  Autonomous reflexive responses may outweigh a human’s own contemplated course of action.

I've always found this to be a problematic dichotomy. This site provides a humorous account of what it considers to be a common misconception that it terms as the Straw Vulcanhttp://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StrawVulcan 

The validity of your statement seems to hinge on how one scopes "rational" or "logical" when describing the action of someone, say overcome with emotion. If one views emotion as (part of) a preference function that (to use very loose analogies here) determines/selects which microtheories are appropriate for a given stimulus, then one can maintain rationality modulo emotions. They become part of a process which conducts a radical reassessment of the primitives of the theory. Sort of an additional factor in determining when one hops from one part of the lattice of theories to another. 

Yet within the reordered primitives, there is some rationality. There is some logic in actions of one seeking revenge for a love betrayed. True, from a different, longer-term or humanist perspective, it might not be a desirable reaction; but it is only from the granting of these assumptions that the thirst for revenge is deemed irrational. Within the bubble of anger fuelled revenge (perhaps even nominally with an appeal to 'an eye-for an eye"), some logic still pervades, no?



(•`'·.¸(`'·.¸(•)¸.·'´)¸.·'´•) .,., 

Adobe LiveCycle Enterprise Architecture - http://www.adobe.com/products/livecycle/
Adobe MAX 2011 - http://technoracle.blogspot.com/2011/03/adobe-max-2011.html
TV Show - http://tv.adobe.com/show/duanes-world/
Blog – http://technoracle.blogspot.com/
Music – http://22ndcenturyofficial.com/
Twitter – http://twitter.com/duanechaos/

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>