Steve said: I strongly suspect biological synapses are tagged in some way to only connect with other synapses carrying dimensionally compatible information.
I totally agree. So one thing that I am wondering about is whether that can be computed using a novel kind of mathematics? Intuitively, I would say absolutely. A truly innovative AI mathematical system would not 'solve' every AI problem but could it be developed so that it helped speed up and direct an initial analysis of input? Intuitively I am pretty sure it can be done, but I am not at all sure that I could come up with a method. Jim Bromer On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 1:13 PM Steve Richfield <[email protected]> wrote: > Jim, > > Many systems, e.g. while adding probabilities to compute probabilities > doesn't make sense; adding counts having poor significance, which can look > a lot like adding probabilities, can make sense to produce a count. > > Where this gets confusing is in sensory fusion. Present practice is > usually some sort of weighted summation, when CAREFUL analysis would > probably involve various nonlinearities to convert inputs to cannonical > form that make sense to add, followed by another nonlinearity to convert > the sum to suitable output units. > > I strongly suspect biological synapses are tagged in some way to only > connect with other synapses carrying dimensionally compatible information. > > Everyone seems to focus on values being computed, when it appears that it > is the dimensionality that restricts learning to potentially rational > processes. > > Steve > > On Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 9:14 AM Jim Bromer <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I originally thought about novel computational rules. Arithmetic is not >> reversible because a computational result is not unique for the input >> operands. That makes it a type of compression. Furthermore it uses a >> limited set of rules. That makes it a super compression method. >> >> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 12:08 PM Jim Bromer <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I guess I understand what you mean. >>> >>> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 12:07 PM Jim Bromer <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> I think your use of metaphors, especially metaphors that were intended >>>> to emphasize your thoughts through exaggeration, may have confused me. >>>> Would you explain your last post Steve? >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 12:02 PM Steve Richfield < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Too much responding without sufficient thought. After a week of >>>>> thought regarding earlier postings on this thread... >>>>> >>>>> Genuine computation involves manipulating numerically expressible >>>>> value (e.g. 0.62), dimensionality (e.g. probability), and significance >>>>> (e.g. +/- 0.1). Outputs of biological neurons appear to fit this model. >>>>> >>>>> HOWEVER, much of AI does NOT fit this model - yet still appears to >>>>> "work". If this is useful than use it, but there usually is no path to >>>>> better solutions. You can't directly understand, optimize, adapt, debug, >>>>> etc., because it is difficult/impossible to wrap your brain around >>>>> quantities representing nothing. >>>>> >>>>> Manipulations that don't fit this model are numerology, not >>>>> mathematics, akin to bring astrology instead of astronomy. >>>>> >>>>> It seems perfectly obvious to me that AGI, when it comes into being, >>>>> will involve NO numerological faux "computation". >>>>> >>>>> Sure, learning could involve developing entirely new computation, but >>>>> it would have to perform potentially valid computations on it's inputs. >>>>> For >>>>> example, adding probabilities is NOT valid, but ORing them could be valid. >>>>> >>>>> Steve >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019, 8:22 AM Alan Grimes via AGI < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> It has the basic structure and organization of a conscious agent, >>>>>> obviously it lacks the other ingredients required to produce a >>>>>> complete >>>>>> mind. >>>>>> >>>>>> Stefan Reich via AGI wrote: >>>>>> > Prednet develops consciousness? >>>>>> > >>>>>> > On Wed, Jun 19, 2019, 06:51 Alan Grimes via AGI < >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Yay, it seems peeps are finally ready to talk about this!! =P >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Lets see if I can fool anyone into thinking I'm actually making >>>>>> > sense by >>>>>> > starting with a first principles approach... Permalink >>>>>> > < >>>>>> https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T395236743964cb4b-M686d9fcf7662ad8dc2fc1130 >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Please report bounces from this address to [email protected] >>>>>> >>>>>> Powers are not rights. >>>>>> >>>>> *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/T395236743964cb4b-M01e0f78ba275b14a18b00cf6> > ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T395236743964cb4b-Me3f6b4fc7a30f8910f892764 Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
