chrilly: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>Below is my favorite one in the list. An example of this are 
>neural-networks. Neural networks are just a parameter-free 
>optimization/estimation method.
>No magic at all, just a boring and not very efficient estimator.

It's not neural networks but just a perceptron with backpropagation 
learning algorithm. There are lots of neural network models in the 
world. Some are developed by neuroscientists or cognitive 
scientists.
#Even backpropagation is used in some real applications, Dr. Amari 
wrote.

>Chrilly
>
>Warning: Cynical Definition...
>
>       My definition of AI is any algorithm that is new in computer
>       science.  Once the algorithm becomes accepted then it's
>       not AI, it's just a boring algorithm.

I agree half of this. Not all algorithms derived from AI are boring 
:-).

>       At one time windows, mouse, menus, scroolbars etc. were considered
>       an AI technique for makeing computers understand natural language.
>       (The menus are a list of valid words the system understands)

Really? I don't know such bizarre ad.

>       This is also why I study "Cognition", not AI.
>
>       R. Keene

Regards,
Hideki

>> Chrilly, your definition of AI is too limited. See, for example,
>> http://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~rapaport/definitions.of.ai.html.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Hideki (gg)
>>
>> chrilly: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>>> However, I have to disagree with this statement:
>>>> "UCT: Complete Antithesis to AI-approach"
>>>>
>>>Martin Mueller quotes J.McCarthy in his thesis:
>>>"The research of Go programs is still in its infancy, but we shall see 
>>>that to bring Go
>>>programs to a level comparable with current Chess programs, investigations 
>>>of a totally
>>>different kind than used in computer chess are needed".
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>UCT is different to Alpha-Beta (not totally, because its some other form 
>>>of search, but it is
>>>different). I am sure, McCarthy had not UCT in mind. It was always the 
>>>goal of McCarthy and
>>>his followers to simulate and to surpass the human mind. HAL in Stanly 
>>>Kubrics Odyssee in
>>>space 2001 is the dream-computer of this discipline.
>>>
>>>UCT has nothing to do with human Go. It has some similarity to the 
>>>behaviour of ant-collonies
>>>(its not in the technical sense an ant-colony algo). It was never the goal 
>>>of AI to explain
>>>ants.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I really thing it is exactly a modern AI approach!! Also it is a
>>>> general algorithm applied to many different domains (and many are not
>>>> two player games, ie max-max problems and not min-max).
>>>>
>>>I full aggree, it is a general and very interesting algorithm which can be 
>>>applied to many
>>>domains.
>>>
>>>How would you define modern AI? Obviously it is not the classic approach 
>>>to mimic humans
>>>anymore. But what is it?
>>>
>>>In my opinion is UCT a statistical estimation method. The armed-bandit is 
>>>classical
>>>statistical problem.
>>>
>>>> I think it is exactly the bad example for the "anti-drosophila 
>>>> thesis"...
>>>>
>>>What do we learn about the human mind from UCT?
>>>
>>>Chrilly
>>>---- inline file
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>computer-go mailing list
>>>[email protected]
>>>http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
>> --
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kato)
>> _______________________________________________
>> computer-go mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ 
>
>_______________________________________________
>computer-go mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kato)
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

Reply via email to