To be fair, I think YKY put perspiration into mathematical structure and it looks like a decent attempt at a fusion of logic and neural networks. But it seems like the next step could be an embryonic program. Personally I feel like I spent too long on my overall design, and some things become clear only through experimentation. AGI is a game of nuanced distinctions, as is reality.
Mike Archbold On 4/30/19, Matt Mahoney <[email protected]> wrote: > The revised paper is a bit better but really doesn't address my > main concerns. I mean the 1% inspiration is done (Edison) and just the 99% > persperation is left to do. Yeah, actually doing experiments and writing up > the results is hard work, but that's how papers get published. Nobody cares > about untested ideas. > > Maybe write up a paper on past work like Genifer from 2010. > http://strong-ai.info/blog/ai/2010/08/08/genifer-general-inference-engine > Why did it fail? What lessons were learned? > > On Tue, Apr 30, 2019, 5:36 AM John Rose <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Matt > "The paper looks like a collection of random ideas with no >> coherent >> structure or goal...." >> >> >> >> Argh... I love this style of paper whenever YKY publishes something my >> eyes are on it. So few (if any) are written this way, it's a terse jazz >> fusion improv of mecho-logical-mathematical thought physics needed to >> describe AGI concept. >> >> >> >> Immediately on the first version when I saw the navigating the labyrinth >> of "thinking" I thought of the quantum many paths simultaneity in >> photosynthesis and YKY mentioning the discovery of a possible correlation >> of Schrödinger and RL... but that item was yanked in the second >> iteration. >> That's OK, sometimes while on the vanguard of thought viewers eyes must >> be >> shielded from that which they explicitly fear the most...coincidentally >> sometimes which is totally obvious thus suspending disbelief while >> maintaining a referential propriety and contemporary academic >> interestingness. >> >> >> >> Also yanked was the expression of the notion for the AGI requirement of >> approximating K-complexity which in that I agree is where all the good >> stuff is…. generally and/or specifically… IMO this where the multi-agent >> consciousness mechanics come in but I’ll shield some eyes on that one :) >> >> >> >> John >> >> >> >> *From:* Stefan Reich via AGI <[email protected]> >> *Sent:* Friday, April 19, 2019 4:21 PM >> *To:* AGI <[email protected]> >> *Subject:* Re: [agi] My AGI 2019 paper draft >> >> >> >> Good review >> >> >> >> On Fri, Apr 19, 2019, 22:02 Matt Mahoney <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> It would help to get your paper published if it had an experimental >> results section. How do you propose to test your system? How do you plan >> to >> compare the output with prior work on comparable systems? What will you >> measure? What benchmarks will you use (for example, image recognition, >> text >> prediction, robotic performance)? >> >> >> >> The paper looks like a collection of random ideas with no coherent >> structure or goal. The math seems to confuse or mislead rather than >> explain. For example you show father(x,y) as a function in the real plain >> rather than a predicate over discrete variables. This is interesting for >> a >> moment, but doesn't go anywhere, so you move on to the next topic. The >> whole paper is like this, plugging variables from one field of study into >> equations from another and hoping something useful comes out. >> >> >> >> I know that you are just full of ideas. But actually writing some code >> that does something interesting might really help in sorting out the >> useful >> ideas from the ones that go nowhere and advance the field of AGI. >> >> >> >> On Fri, Apr 19, 2019, 9:15 AM YKY (Yan King Yin, 甄景贤) < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> This is my latest draft paper: >> >> https://drive.google.com/open?id=12v_gMtq4GzNtu1kUn9MundMc6OEhJdS8 >> >> >> >> I submitted the same basic idea in AGI 2016, but was rejected by some >> rather superficial reasons. At that time, reinforcement learning for AI >> was not widely heard of, but since then it has become a ubiquitous hot >> topic. I hope this time I can get published, as it would allow me to >> share >> my ideas more easily with other researchers and mathematicians so that I >> could solicit their help and improve my theory, possibly starting the >> coding project as well. >> >> >> >> Comments and suggestions are welcome 😊 >> >> -- >> >> *YKY* >> >> *"The ultimate goal of mathematics is to eliminate any need for >> intelligent thought"* -- Alfred North Whitehead >> >> *Artificial General Intelligence List <https://agi.topicbox.com/latest>* >> / AGI / see discussions <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi> + >> participants <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/members> + delivery >> options <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription> Permalink >> <https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T3cad55ae5144b323-M5270f3477e3d62edc3b33160> >> ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T3cad55ae5144b323-M014202a0f8ac5a7843f55a52 Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
