Anyone interested in a VB.net and/or C# project for creating real AI then mail me at da_rikard@hotmail.com and i shall tell you more about the CES Project and the SC-11 simulation.

BMW-Guy,

I'm a programmer of VB, Java, and many other languages. If you have any specific questions, I suggest you join up at www.asp.net (microsoft's .net forums), www.vbforums.com or www.webdesignforums.net (i moderate there).

PS - what's up, man? :D

Anyone interested in a VB.net and/or C# project for creating real AI then mail me at da_rikard@hotmail.com and i shall tell you more about the CES Project and the SC-11 simulation.'Real AI' in VBnet is just a funny group of words that should never be used together.

As for 'real AI' in C#... well it's more likely... but I have no idea what you mean by 'real'

Perhaps they mean "Real Artificial Intelligence" as aposed to "Something called Artificial Intelligence thats just a Bot(Autonomous piece of code)", however I don't think a real AI would be programmed in any conventional language, it would require at least assembly level and the entire manipulation of intelligence would have to be right down the very logic gates that the understanding of the language is constructed.

(Afterall it's said we store and process information at the genetic level, this is what it would mean for a computer to assimilate the same)

The problem is that we don't REALLY know what intelligence is. We know it has something to do with the brain. Beyond that we are fairly clueless.

"Afterall it's said we store and process information at the genetic level"
I don't think this referes to the knowledge we is used by our 'intelligence'

I have been programming since i was 7, i think i can determine which language i wish to use myself.
However, there is not language which will optimally give my AI concept justice so we will create the CES programming language later on when we get paid for our work.

What do i mean with Real? Well, human intelligence. I have a new concept with which i really can create a human replica, the beauty is that i do not need 10 super computers, i do not even need 1. A normal PC would do just fine for my AI, but it would need to be modified a little so that it suites our AI a lil better.

k, the SC-11 simulation.
We will start a artificial lifeform up in a room (will be built as a robot in the near future). We will start it up with no knowledge. (which will prove how adapable it is).
It will have to figure out how to use the key on the door. It will do this on the first try and do you know why? Because it is as smart as you and I.
When it figures that out it will get to room 2. In room 2 it will have to build something more advanced. I thought first of a electro-magnet so that it could shoot a hole in the wall. But that might harm the lifeform when it is a robot so i will have to change room 2.
In conclusion, it is as smart as a human. my algorithm is universal so it would solve almost any problem.
Don't believe me? Nah, i am used to that. However if you are interested then mail me at da_rikard@hotmail.com and ill tell you more.

We may be hijacking this thread... but I think Stryder can split it if he feels that is so.

We will start a artificial lifeform up in a room (will be built as a robot in the near future). We will start it up with no knowledge. (which will prove how adapable it is). It will have to figure out how to use the key on the door. It will do this on the first try and do you know why? Because it is as smart as you and I.Ok... you are skipping some steps. Basically you are saying:
1) I will build a robot
2) I will write a program
3) The program will have human intelligence

Could you please explain what is involved in step 2. I eat up anything having to do with AI research and have written a few programs involving it (mostly parsers, NLP, and non-recurssive path-finding).

I'd bve interested to see how you plan to implement human intelligence in a computer, when we don't know what human intelligence actually is.

To use the field's terminology, you're talking about 'strong AI' and 'weak AI.' Strong AI is an AI that can reason and think for itself, and is very likely sentient. Weak AI is what we have had to date, where the AI can only act as if it's intelligent by emulating human behavior.

I don't mean to be overly harsh, but I'll believe this magical artificial life form when I see it. For one thing, I see a large problem here:
We will start it up with no knowledge. (which will prove how adapable it is).
It will have to figure out how to use the key on the door. It will do this on the first try and do you know why? Because it is as smart as you and I.
On the first try? It must be pure chance if it has no knowledge. The only reason you or I would try to use the key in the lock is because we've been trained to use keys in this manner.
Or do you mean that you'll give it a key, point it at the door, and tell it to figure out how to use the key on that door? That sounds like knowledge to me.

I have been programming since i was 7, i think i can determine which language i wish to use myself.

Regardless of how long you've been programming, there are many things you either cannot do in VB, or take quite a bit more effort to accomplish than it would with another more powerful language. VB has its place, and that place is on the Windows desktop.

my algorithm is universal so it would solve almost any problem.

That's quite a strong statement. I get the sense that your concept is still in the idea stage and you haven't produced anything yet. I would be very intested to hear if anything develops once you get it to a working stage, as I think you'll probably run into some problems that you're not expecting. I'm not trying to discourage you, I'm just trying to point out that you're probably in for more hurdles than you think.

well actually we have been doing this for almost a year now so we are in the developing stage but you are right, i have improved the AI on the path.

We do not need super-computers to develop our AI, nor do we need the extra power that C++ could give us so id rather use the language that i find the simplest.

No, i will not give it a key and point at the door but it will have the ability to interact. Please note that i do not have to tell it anything about its world only that if i do not then it will be next to impossible to read the output.
It cannot see color, shape. It only sees text and even that is not neccesary. Can it be integrated in the real world? Yes, but it requires some of the most advanced robotic eyes for that.
All that it really needs to get as an input from the SC-11 simulation is to know when a state changes. Etc, when a door is unlocked instead of locked. Just things that will be able to detect.
I don't want to say much about the AI and I do not want people to believe me, actually i want to prove people wrong but the truth is that ill need someone more with lots of time who is a grand VB.net/C# programmer. The others do not have much time so ill need one more atleast. Mail me and i shall tell thee more.

Persol,
I'd bve interested to see how you plan to implement human intelligence in a computer, when we don't know what human intelligence actually is.
Not knowing what to implement, is not a fatal problem if you do know what it should mimmick, e.g. a human. The Turing test (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_test) circumvents our inability to accurately define intelligence with a comparison on a feature of intelligence (to fool around a questioner) between humans and software.

Baal Zebul,
Please note that i do not have to tell it anything about its world only that if i do not then it will be next to impossible to read the output.
Why? How is the readability of the output related to its initial knowledge of the world?

All that it really needs to get as an input from the SC-11 simulation is to know when a state changes.
So what state changes do you envision? How do you describe them? How is your artificial life form able to interact? Does it have the ability to actively change states? If so, should i see it as a MUD like command language (e.g. "use key on door" type of commands)?

I don't want to say much about the AI and I do not want people to believe me, actually i want to prove people wrong but the truth is that ill need someone more with lots of time who is a grand VB.net/C# programmer.
Well, if you want people to get enthousiastic about your project, you at least need to be able to draw a general outline of how your concept works. As Persol and Malkiri illustrated, there are some serious issues you have left unaddressed in your explanations. Without addressing them properly, I can imagine that it will be quite difficult to inspire talented programmers to spend time on a project lacking a concrete basis.

Baal Zebul, I would suggest a cheaper alternative to Robotics, Try using VR. (Virtual Reality) this way you can generate objects that you interact with at the same level as the intelligence your trying to create.

You could create and name an object a chair, and the Intelligence would then decide what it should remember as a chair, but do note with human intelligence a definition of chair would have to be repeated many times to ascertain what a chair actually is. In fact occasionally our primitive development when that young would cause other things to be refered to as chair.

(Like parents teaching a baby how to differenciate, where a mother is with the baby more often and the irony of the first word it knows being "Daddy".)

Baal, perhaps you should contact Jim Wightman, who I believe has beaten you to solving the AI problem with his nannybots.
Or perhaps you ARE Jim Wightman.

mouse,

Why? How is the readability of the output related to its initial knowledge of the world?

Stryder gets it but not you. He said the thing about calling the chair a chair. Well that is all i tell it in SC-11 (even though it does not even have to know that). But what is easiest to understand when reviewing the output, That it says "Key" or "2a42hi412sd" or some other randomly self-created "word"?

So what state changes do you envision? How do you describe them? How is your artificial life form able to interact? Does it have the ability to actively change states? If so, should i see it as a MUD like command language (e.g. "use key on door" type of commands)?

Yes, you should. Somewhat like that. Let me ask you, how do you know that you have opened a door? Maybe you have experience or may be you are lucky. Maybe you see that the lock has moved or maybe you hear the click. There are tons of status changes. However my AI only needs the status changes when it has no information and i have designed SC-11 accordingly were it survives with the absolute minimum of information.

Well, if you want people to get enthousiastic about your project, you at least need to be able to draw a general outline of how your concept works. As Persol and Malkiri illustrated, there are some serious issues you have left unaddressed in your explanations. Without addressing them properly, I can imagine that it will be quite difficult to inspire talented programmers to spend time on a project lacking a concrete basis.

You know, i have been to a lots of places. I in all of those places used a technic that i learned from when trying to rally artists for my game developing crew. What i do is that i tell everybody that i am better than them (in some way) and the result are (from the noobs) that they call me insane or a liar whilst the professional contact me, join me and work till they have proved that they are better than me.
You might want to remember this for future reference. But ill not do that here at SciForums because people here answer posts so quickly and most of the time have something intelligent to say that id not want to risk my "future" in this forum.


And Stryder when it comes to VR, well just say that i have an other invetion there which is lets say 5 years before its time. We plan on selling that too but the cost is somewhat large. We were first to build The Republic but that was obsolete when i thought a lil more about it. Then came The Republic 2 (TR2), a good idea since we would start them with no knowledge as in SC-11 but there were too few dead ends in TR2 so i dropped it rather than modifiying it. SC-11 was the next step, (we have changed it now thanks to a "friend" of mine) and it will be put in a maze with no knowledge (sort of like a RPG game) where it tries to get from point A to point B and along the maze there are obsticles such as the door issue.

You could create and name an object a chair, and the Intelligence would then decide what it should remember as a chair, but do note with human intelligence a definition of chair would have to be repeated many times to ascertain what a chair actually is. In fact occasionally our primitive development when that young would cause other things to be refered to as chair.

Yes, that is what i plan on doing and have done already but thanks for saying "but do note with human intelligence a definition of chair would have to be repeated many times to ascertain what a chair actually is. In fact occasionally our primitive development when that young would cause other things to be refered to as chair." I had not thought of having empirc data for objects also (yet), thank you indeed.

I would suggest using www.sourceforge.net as a place to launch a project, since it would give you enough space and a website to allow you to generate a Project Goal and statement that people can refer to.

Since you are claiming to be so many years (I would estimate over 50) in advance of the bleeding edge of technology, could you please give us some additional details.

What architecture for learning language are you implementing in your A.I. construct?
If it has no language, how does it reason?
How does it solve implicatures, i.e. I know X, I know Y, therefore I infer Z.
Does your construct have access to any external ontologies/dictionaries/corpus?
What are its sensory abilities, its inputs?
What problem solving algorithms does it implement?
How are you planning on translating its output?
How are you planning on representing objects?
How are you planning on resolving abiguity between different senses of a given concept? (example: he knocked on the door, versus he walked through the door)
What data structures does it use to hold knowledge?
Is it evolving?
Does it use rules, finite state machines, ATMs?
Give us a clue!

If you do not give more details, you cannot blame people for assuming that you are an inventor only of wild ideas. I work on a tiny corner of the A.I. problem, a subset of a subset. My belief (and a well-founded one) is that A.I. is a huge unsolved area of study; a problem to be chipped away at, not solved in one great leap.

Stryder gets it but not you. He said the thing about calling the chair a chair. Well that is all i tell it in SC-11 (even though it does not even have to know that). But what is easiest to understand when reviewing the output, That it says "Key" or "2a42hi412sd" or some other randomly self-created "word"?
Fine, what process would get your AI decide to produce a random string for something? Does it make an inventory of all that it "sees" in its virtual world, and attach labels to it if not done by you already? Which brings me to another question, does your system take into account a line-of-sight, does it register objects hidden behind a wall?

Yes, you should. Somewhat like that. Let me ask you, how do you know that you have opened a door? Maybe you see that the lock has moved or maybe you hear the click. There are tons of status changes.
We humans have figured out which status changes are important, and which we can filter out. That took time to learn, and moreover, we have a mechanism enabling us to learn in the first place. What mechanism do you envision for your system to know what status changes are relevant to complete its goals and which can be disregarded?

However my AI only needs the status changes when it has no information
What do you define with this information? Is it its goal list, its task list, its list of objects it can "see", a list of previous status changes, or a combination of these?

i have designed SC-11 accordingly were it survives with the absolute minimum of information.
How do you qualify a minimum of information? Do you mean that if you tell it that there is a room, a door, a key and that its sole purpose in life is to get through the door, that this is the minimum information needed for it to succeed? If so, how does it know that a room consists of walls, a floor and a roof? Does it have access to a dictionary defining a room as such? And what about the definition of a door, a wall, a floor and a roof? How does it know that it can not move through walls, floors, roofs, closed doors? Does it just try to move through one of these and remembers the failure of doing so? If so, how does it generalize from one wall to another? Does it assume that if a certain action fails on a object of a certain class, that it will fail on every other object of that class? If so, how do you account for exceptions and dependencies. If it discovers that a key can be used to open a door, it could incorrectly conclude that every key can open all doors. What mechanism is built in to counter or refine previously made assumptions?

And Stryder when it comes to VR, well just say that i have an other invetion there which is lets say 5 years before its time. We plan on selling that too but the cost is somewhat large. We were first to build The Republic but that was obsolete when i thought a lil more about it. Then came The Republic 2 (TR2), a good idea since we would start them with no knowledge as in SC-11 but there were too few dead ends in TR2 so i dropped it rather than modifiying it. SC-11 was the next step, (we have changed it now thanks to a "friend" of mine) and it will be put in a maze with no knowledge (sort of like a RPG game) where it tries to get from point A to point B and along the maze there are obsticles such as the door issue.

Dropping names and acronyms out of context doesn't make your project sound better. Please, at least explain what "The Republic" and "SC-11" are if you're going to refer to them.

Another problem with claiming your AI is as intelligent as a human is that you're interpreting the input and output on its behalf. This:

You're in a room.
There's a door here.
There's a key on the floor.

is not the same as sitting a robot with sensors of some sort in an empty room with a door and a key. I'll even assume it can identify the key and door, which is not a trivial problem. There's a large difference between your AI replying "use key in keyhole in door" and having the AI-in-robot pick up the key, put it in the keyhole, and turning it.

Lastly...if you're willing to divulge details to people if they email you, why are you reluctant to post more of them here?

Forgive me for being so breif about my AI, i am highly paranoid and since i do not want any competition i try not to explain much about it. I barely trust PGP to share my ideas.


Stryderunknown,

I would suggest using www.sourceforge.net as a place to launch a project, since it would give you enough space and a website to allow you to generate a Project Goal and statement that people can refer to.

Perhaps, but i already have lots of other places where i can upload my website. It is not complete yet but ill look into using sourceforge.

What architecture for learning language are you implementing in your A.I. construct?
If it has no language, how does it reason?
How does it solve implicatures, i.e. I know X, I know Y, therefore I infer Z.
Does your construct have access to any external ontologies/dictionaries/corpus?
What are its sensory abilities, its inputs?
What problem solving algorithms does it implement?
How are you planning on translating its output?
How are you planning on representing objects?
How are you planning on resolving abiguity between different senses of a given concept? (example: he knocked on the door, versus he walked through the door)
What data structures does it use to hold knowledge?
Is it evolving?
Does it use rules, finite state machines, ATMs?
Give us a clue!


Who said that it does not use language?
It uses the CES language, which is similar to english with some grammar modifications, i believe that i have already said that.

From NN i have created sort of a mixture between Trail and Error and Back-Propagating systems. (Back-Propagating might be a little clue, Just a hint)

In the real world it would have eyes that can see 3D, they should be able to make a 3D view of an object and apply a texture to it. (This would allow it recognize ojects even if it only has seen bits of it) It would also be able to zoom in and out. This is the minimum but in military application it would of course also have night and heat vision and it would probably be able to detect hidden weapons and see through walls too.
In the digital world it does not have to see more than text, however in order to create more advanced simulations one might give the abbility to see color and shape.
I do not have to translate the output. I do not have to translate the input.

This is the best i can say, it is pattern recognition on multiple levels but structured as neural nets, using a mixture between Trial and Error and Back-Propagating systems, this gives a what you would get out of Genetic Algorithms and Expert Systems. It creates its own natural language based on interaction and knowledge. In short, it is human or next to human.
(I can only put it in the previous AI terminology cause then people cannot understand how it works fully.)

mouse,

Fine, what process would get your AI decide to produce a random string for something? Does it make an inventory of all that it "sees" in its virtual world, and attach labels to it if not done by you already? Which brings me to another question, does your system take into account a line-of-sight, does it register objects hidden behind a wall?

Yes, almost like that.
Inh military application it might be able to see through walls but that is not standard. However it will always try to examine the objects more and more.

We humans have figured out which status changes are important, and which we can filter out. That took time to learn, and moreover, we have a mechanism enabling us to learn in the first place. What mechanism do you envision for your system to know what status changes are relevant to complete its goals and which can be disregarded?

Well, what is important? If you only will open doors then you dont have to know much. However if you are to repair door then you might need to know more, right?

What do you define with this information? Is it its goal list, its task list, its list of objects it can "see", a list of previous status changes, or a combination of these?

A combination and a little more to it.

How do you qualify a minimum of information? Do you mean that if you tell it that there is a room, a door, a key and that its sole purpose in life is to get through the door, that this is the minimum information needed for it to succeed? If so, how does it know that a room consists of walls, a floor and a roof? Does it have access to a dictionary defining a room as such? And what about the definition of a door, a wall, a floor and a roof? How does it know that it can not move through walls, floors, roofs, closed doors? Does it just try to move through one of these and remembers the failure of doing so? If so, how does it generalize from one wall to another? Does it assume that if a certain action fails on a object of a certain class, that it will fail on every other object of that class? If so, how do you account for exceptions and dependencies. If it discovers that a key can be used to open a door, it could incorrectly conclude that every key can open all doors. What mechanism is built in to counter or refine previously made assumptions?

Well, it will not know that there is a roof since the roof in no way could affect the simulation. It will have no dictonary, it will create a dictionary.
Yes, you are right. It can think that a key can open a door when the truth is that that key just openes one door. That is proved with empirical data, so if it solves the problem once and fails two times then it has learned that that key just worked for that particullar door. It could also think that the empirical data proves that the key can not open any more doors but that will not happened since it has worked once, so it will know that that key will work on that door.

malkiri,

Dropping names and acronyms out of context doesn't make your project sound better. Please, at least explain what "The Republic" and "SC-11" are if you're going to refer to them.

Sure, this is a copy from our website. I have not fully completed the SC-11 part yet but i guess that does not mean anything to you any way.


"The Republic (TR)

The Republic is a simulation of a medieval society with 19 inhabitants, all with their specific capabilities and their tasks. The idea with the republic was to show the adaptability of the CES AI in order to prove not just its human like intelligence but also show that it was as grand at adapting to harsh environments as bacteria.

What really failed the Republic was that it was created in order to make sure that if one inhabitant failed then the whole society would fail within a short time if it could not adapt. However, The Republic was too pre-programmed in the sense that it was created within boundaries that always would give a positive result.



The Republic 2 (TR2)

In order to achieve more human results with a higher error percentage it was decided to create the Republic 2, a world with 3 individuals, Adam, Eve and Jesus.

Adam was the father, the strong man suited for physical activities such as cutting wood and hunting whilst Eve had the capabilities of foraging and cooking. Since the idea with the Republic 2 was that they should be started up with no knowledge what the CES team wanted out of TR2 was for Adam and Eve to solve all problems in the world and then teach baby Jesus all the knowledge they had so that the society could go on. The disadvantage once again was that the Republic 2 was too limited, too little dead ends that the AI would try to solve before deciding to move on to the next problem. A slight modification in the world we built for the ALF's could correct that mistake but the glitch was too excessive since the amount of data it required was overlooked. The amount of data that TR2 would require was comprehensible to some of the most advanced AGI creations and by doing so the CES Project had failed in their beliefs.



SC-11

When the TR2 simulation was obsolete SC-11 was the next concept that would be undertaken rather than continuing the trend of creating a better and more advanced republic simulation.

There are no disadvantages to the SC-11 simulation except perhaps that it cannot simulate every problem that might occur in the real world. "


is not the same as sitting a robot with sensors of some sort in an empty room with a door and a key. I'll even assume it can identify the key and door, which is not a trivial problem. There's a large difference between your AI replying "use key in keyhole in door" and having the AI-in-robot pick up the key, put it in the keyhole, and turning it.

Why not? The robot will reason in the same manner as the simulated robot. Turning is an action and instead of sending the output to a human viewed text it just sends it to the parts in its body that are affected in the Turn command.
Key and Door are merely object (no matter what they are called), they just give X, Y and Z cordinates for the robot to use when calibrating its Turn command.

This will probably sound even worse but i do not care, being on the safe side is always better.

In the real world it would have eyes that can see 3D, they should be able to make a 3D view of an object and apply a texture to it. (This would allow it recognize ojects even if it only has seen bits of it) It would also be able to zoom in and out. This is the minimum but in military application it would of course also have night and heat vision and it would probably be able to detect hidden weapons and see through walls too.


Your system can consistently identify arbitrary objects from an arbitrary viewpoint, particularly from a view of only a portion of the objects?

I do not have to translate the output. I do not have to translate the input.

As I mentioned in my last post, you are translating both the input and output when you run the AI in a text simulation.

Well, what is important? If you only will open doors then you dont have to know much. However if you are to repair door then you might need to know more, right?


Are you saying that your AI doesn't need to discard apparently irrelevant information as it might be useful later? This misses the point of what mouse was saying. I hear keys tapping from other cubicles while I sit at my desk all day long. I don't remove this fact from my knowledge base. However, I also don't react to it - I simply ignore it. I think the question was more along these lines - how will your system know which environmental changes to ignore?

Why not? The robot will reason in the same manner as the simulated robot. Turning is an action and instead of sending the output to a human viewed text it just sends it to the parts in its body that are affected in the Turn command.
Key and Door are merely object (no matter what they are called), they just give X, Y and Z cordinates for the robot to use when calibrating its Turn command.

Because it needs to know which parts of its body to move and how to move them. Since the robot is given no knowledge ahead of time, this means it not only has to figure out that putting the key in the door, turning it, and opening it will bring it closer to its goal, but it also has to figure out how to reach down, pick up the key, move to the door, put the key in the keyhole, turn the key, grasp the doorknob, and open the door. All this information is not required when the AI will simply output "get key," "open door with key."

I did not say it didn't use language. I only said, if it does, what mechanisms does it have for learning it? Do you use the 'principles and parameters' approach to language learning, are you a connectionist, a lexical functionalist? What type of grammar are you using?

Baal Zebul
[...] i do not want any competition i try not to explain much about it.
You are planning a financial gain from your project? If that is the case, what prospects do you offer your potential programmers?

It uses the CES language, which is similar to english with some grammar modifications, i believe that i have already said that.
If it is similar to English, how do you propose dealing with the ambiguities that leda noted a few posts earlier?

From NN i have created sort of a mixture between Trail and Error and Back-Propagating systems. (Back-Propagating might be a little clue, Just a hint)
This is a bit confusing. The back propagation algorithm is based on trial and error: it is a method of adjusting weights by comparing the output of the neural network with a sample set. How do you propose a mixture of those two terms, if they are already linked with each other?

In the real world it would have eyes that can see 3D
See 3D? How does that work? Even our own eyes only see in 2D, the light falls on a flat retina obviously registering a 2D version of the world. If i remember correctly, the perception of depth is introduced in our brain, where, among other factors, the different visions from left and right eye are used to create the illusion of depth. Maybe someone in the biology section can give you a more accurate or detailed description of this process.

This is the best i can say, it is pattern recognition on multiple levels but structured as neural nets, using a mixture between Trial and Error and Back-Propagating systems, this gives a what you would get out of Genetic Algorithms and Expert Systems.
Multple levels of what? Layers in the neural network? First of all, I'm not sure if terminology is correctly applied here. As I've explained above, I can not envision a mixture between trail and error and back-propagation systems. Secondly, if such was possible i can not see how the result of it would be equivalent to genetic algorithms and expert systems. Both of these are approaches to completely different areas. Genetic algorithms is good for optimization, expert systems traditionally work on a more concretely defined rule set. What you are claiming to implement, human intelligence, is neither a pure optimilisation process nor a feasible with a concretely defined rule set.

It creates its own natural language based on interaction and knowledge. In short, it is human or next to human.
Humans learn a language by mimicking those who already mastered language. Who or what is your system mimicking? You?

I can only put it in the previous AI terminology cause then people cannot understand how it works fully.
I'm not sure if you are using AI terminology in the manner as I've understood it.

Well, what is important? If you only will open doors then you dont have to know much. However if you are to repair door then you might need to know more, right?
Yes, but how does your system know or discover which pieces of information are relevant and which are not? How does it make a correlation between an action and a state change? If they happen after eachother within a certain time frame? If so, how do you determine what is the most suitable time frame?

Well, it will not know that there is a roof since the roof in no way could affect the simulation.
But if the roof is there, and the bot can "see" the roof, why would the bot ignore it? What rule in it tells it that it should use keys, but that it should not try to use roofs? How ever silly the last piece of the question sounds, a bot without no initial knowledge what so ever, has no idea if a roof is relevant with regard to fullfilling its mission.

It will have no dictonary, it will create a dictionary.
Ok, how will it describe a wall? Attaching simply a random label is not creating a dictionary. If it is to be of any use, it should recognize what makes a wall different from other objects, like e.g. the floor.

Yes, you are right. It can think that a key can open a door when the truth is that that key just openes one door. That is proved with empirical data, so if it solves the problem once and fails two times then it has learned that that key just worked for that particullar door.
Why? There are other conclusions concievable. E.g. why not conclude that the two doors which did not open to the key appear to be not functioning? Given its lack of knowledge about the reliability of doors and its situation (a room, three doors and a key) it can not choose which hypothesis is the correct one or even assume which is more likely. How do you propose to handle this?

The robot will reason in the same manner as the simulated robot. Turning is an action and instead of sending the output to a human viewed text it just sends it to the parts in its body that are affected in the Turn command.
Key and Door are merely object (no matter what they are called), they just give X, Y and Z cordinates for the robot to use when calibrating its Turn command.
No, the real world is significantly more complex. Simple object recognition is not a trivial matter. How to recognize the key from the texture of the floor? How to recognize the key from different angles? And I'm not even speculating about the complexity in getting the key inserted in the correct manner in the door's key hole.

This will probably sound even worse but i do not care, being on the safe side is always better.
What safe side? You are worried that people are going to patent your ideas? I for one am not making a run on the patent office just yet. At this point, I can only see problems with your approach, rather than innovative solutions.

Baal,

Seems you first projects are usually refered to as "Ant Farms", namely worlds where multiple intereactive elements strive to survive and is based on how some people use to (and probably still) make ant farms in the real world.

I've seen a few older concepts when it was first starting to be used, like Bacteria's growth in a petri dish which was a kind of Chaos demo in itself, since it would seed differently based upon which square you clicked in a 20x20 grid, you could even seed more than one square. It followed the rule that from your seeds it would grow to the squares that neighboured it's sides, once that growth occured, the squares surrounding it would starve the bacteria where the seed occured, and then that dead bacteria area would become food to be eaten by the bacteria again. When it got to the edge of the petri dish it obviously reached an equillibrium of growth an decline. (which exists when you have closed systems)

I personally actually do want to get around to scripting a decent "Ant farm" for my own project, which involves creating a Virtual world where characters can be interacted with at the same level they compute at. (Namely you can see an object, so can the character. The object is defined a name, which both you and the character understands is the object. You can examine the object to which the character can examine the object. ... Move the object etc.)

However if such life is breathed into the characters in this way, will people still be able to play such games as Grand Theft, in the knowledge that the little old lady they ran over actually lived???

This doesn't approve very well thought out. You have mentioned that you are going to do a dozen or so things which require huge problems solved that people working on AI for years have not been able to solve....

...and you plan to do this with a group of random programmers who most likely have very little 'real' AI experience...

I personally actually do want to get around to scripting a decent "Ant farm" for my own project, which involves creating a Virtual world where characters can be interacted with at the same level they compute at. (Namely you can see an object, so can the character. The object is defined a name, which Move the object etc.)Now this sounds more realistic and interesting. Many games and the like seem to already follow the "both you and the character understands is the object. You can examine the object to which the character can examine the object".

Something else I should mention is that Baal's suggestion might not be as absurd as you might think, for instance take a look at http://www.visual-prolog.com/

A discussion on prolog was raise in the forums previously but my understanding is that prolog wasn't just used as a language with syntax created for problem solving and solution making, it was about creating something that had the ability to make decisions.

It lacks the functionality of C++ but is still utilised in this area, so it suggests VB can be used in the same way too.

It is suggested that prolog can be used to do that... but it hasn't actually been done. All it does is simplify dealing with the syntax... which still just leaves you with a bot.

Your system can consistently identify arbitrary objects from an arbitrary viewpoint, particularly from a view of only a portion of the objects?

that is not the everyday english that i know but i think it means that it can still understand the object even if it only sees a small part of the object, correct?

Well, it can always identify it even if does not have the whole picture however, it might not have enough info in order to do anything intelligent with it.

As I mentioned in my last post, you are translating both the input and output when you run the AI in a text simulation.

On the computer, no not really. However it will be pre-programmed so that it will get the right label on the items.
In the real world, i would translate the input and on the output it would be translated to robotic commands (a 1 here and a 0 over there perhaps)

Are you saying that your AI doesn't need to discard apparently irrelevant information as it might be useful later? This misses the point of what mouse was saying. I hear keys tapping from other cubicles while I sit at my desk all day long. I don't remove this fact from my knowledge base. However, I also don't react to it - I simply ignore it. I think the question was more along these lines - how will your system know which environmental changes to ignore?

Yeah, that i had not thought about actually. However it is easiliy changed. Just another topic for empiricial data. Let me ask you. If you were put in command of a nuclear plant without any knowledge, then how would you know which buttons to press if something happened on the first day? You would read a manual, ask somebody or guess, right? Why would my AI do anything else?

Because it needs to know which parts of its body to move and how to move them. Since the robot is given no knowledge ahead of time, this means it not only has to figure out that putting the key in the door, turning it, and opening it will bring it closer to its goal, but it also has to figure out how to reach down, pick up the key, move to the door, put the key in the keyhole, turn the key, grasp the doorknob, and open the door. All this information is not required when the AI will simply output "get key," "open door with key."

It is of course pre-programmed to some extent. Of course it needs to know how to move. I said that it was Real Artificial Intelligence and not Divine Artificial Intelligence.

I did not say it didn't use language. I only said, if it does, what mechanisms does it have for learning it? Do you use the 'principles and parameters' approach to language learning, are you a connectionist, a lexical functionalist? What type of grammar are you using?

Im sorry, i must have missunderstood you then.
Once again english beyond me, i would normally ask someone but i can't find anyone online better than me in english. Ill get back to this when i know the question.

You are planning a financial gain from your project? If that is the case, what prospects do you offer your potential programmers?

Well, we once had it up for discussion if we should create a AI programmer that could build us lots of OS's and sell them. I can only offer 0$ right now, however i am a fair man and we are 5 right now and we would each be entitled to 20% each of what ever, the more that join, the lesser percents each.
I have students in my team, (i am a stundet myself), i a professional AI developer on my team making 100,000$ a year. I am talking to other professional ai developers about them joing us whilst i have about 20 others wanting to join my team but they are all classified as people whom i cannot trust or people who know to little.

If it is similar to English, how do you propose dealing with the ambiguities that leda noted a few posts earlier?

Since i did not understand what leda said fully ill get back to this later too.

This is a bit confusing. The back propagation algorithm is based on trial and error: it is a method of adjusting weights by comparing the output of the neural network with a sample set. How do you propose a mixture of those two terms, if they are already linked with each other?

That i cannot say. It is not full back-propagating. Maybe i should had said that it uses a neural nets concept instead. This only confusses it i see.

See 3D? How does that work? Even our own eyes only see in 2D, the light falls on a flat retina obviously registering a 2D version of the world. If i remember correctly, the perception of depth is introduced in our brain, where, among other factors, the different visions from left and right eye are used to create the illusion of depth. Maybe someone in the biology section can give you a more accurate or detailed description of this process.

i know, but what i mean with 3D is that if you stand here then you do not see the same as you can see when you have moved one meter to the right. I have been making 3D games and when i think about 2D i think of a flat surface (a platform game) where someone walks on that surface, whilst 3D means that you can move in X, Y and Z. We only see a flat surface of course but i still think that it is a 3D environment.
A morphing sequence does not exist, it is just our brains that make it happen. So when you see someone transform from a human to an alien in movies then you have made that happen, but it is still called Morphing.

Multple levels of what? Layers in the neural network? First of all, I'm not sure if terminology is correctly applied here. As I've explained above, I can not envision a mixture between trail and error and back-propagation systems. Secondly, if such was possible i can not see how the result of it would be equivalent to genetic algorithms and expert systems. Both of these are approaches to completely different areas. Genetic algorithms is good for optimization, expert systems traditionally work on a more concretely defined rule set. What you are claiming to implement, human intelligence, is neither a pure optimilisation process nor a feasible with a concretely defined rule set.

The professional AI developer in my team has already called it "Neural Genetic Natural Language" He, just as me think that it is the core of AI, "mixing" all the other AI and combined creating real AI. (Not all concepts, ill not say which)

Humans learn a language by mimicking those who already mastered language. Who or what is your system mimicking? You?

No, reality. It creates the mimick, i never said that it would use the same words as we do. However if it was to have audio input then it could mimick the speakers of a conversation and use that data in many fields.

I'm not sure if you are using AI terminology in the manner as I've understood it.

I bet you that i would if i was american.

Yes, but how does your system know or discover which pieces of information are relevant and which are not? How does it make a correlation between an action and a state change? If they happen after eachother within a certain time frame? If so, how do you determine what is the most suitable time frame?

Yes, the only disadvantage is time. I press a button in room one, how the hell could i possibly know that it opened the door in room 5? I dont think there is any way actually except the concept of Origin Tracing, one of the earliy features of my design. However, why would anyone need to know that the button in room 1 opened the door in room 5? And if it really has too then it could use Origin Tracing but that would mean an substansical amount of trial and error really.

But if the roof is there, and the bot can "see" the roof, why would the bot ignore it? What rule in it tells it that it should use keys, but that it should not try to use roofs? How ever silly the last piece of the question sounds, a bot without no initial knowledge what so ever, has no idea if a roof is relevant with regard to fullfilling its mission.

Yeah, you are right. What i meant was that everything appear in text and the roof does not appear so it can't be used. However if it is just an empty room then it would try to do something with the roof but only once till it realises that it cannot do anything with it.

Ok, how will it describe a wall? Attaching simply a random label is not creating a dictionary. If it is to be of any use, it should recognize what makes a wall different from other objects, like e.g. the floor.

k, what is specific of walls? If you can only see text? Not colors, not material.

Why? There are other conclusions concievable. E.g. why not conclude that the two doors which did not open to the key appear to be not functioning? Given its lack of knowledge about the reliability of doors and its situation (a room, three doors and a key) it can not choose which hypothesis is the correct one or even assume which is more likely. How do you propose to handle this?

In SC-11 it would not. It lacks knowledge. In a human relica it would be dynamic depeding on previous patterns.

No, the real world is significantly more complex. Simple object recognition is not a trivial matter. How to recognize the key from the texture of the floor? How to recognize the key from different angles? And I'm not even speculating about the complexity in getting the key inserted in the correct manner in the door's key hole.

Well, it would make a 3D model of it and attach a texture to it. If you are talking about recognizing the object and not using it.

What safe side? You are worried that people are going to patent your ideas? I for one am not making a run on the patent office just yet. At this point, I can only see problems with your approach, rather than innovative solutions.

You cannot even see my approach and that is the way i like it. But you also asked me about what i would offer programmers that would join me, if it is money you want then i would have you sign a NDA first or most likely you would not even be in our team. I want to trust all my members and i do not have any NDA with them in order to create a casual environment.

However if such life is breathed into the characters in this way, will people still be able to play such games as Grand Theft, in the knowledge that the little old lady they ran over actually lived???

Have not thought about it in that way. Actually i think after what you just said ill not have the AI integrated in any games where they can die. Actually when i wrote the framwork for The Republic i instructed the others that they should abort the simulation if they would ever see that it was going to fail.
Stryder, we should chat sometime, you seem to be a trustworthy character.

...and you plan to do this with a group of random programmers who most likely have very little 'real' AI experience...

Random programmers? Well, all of us have experience in game development. We all know VB and/or C# (at least). We all agree that military application is the way that we should go even if Johan thinks that we should start with industrial application since it is a larger market.

A discussion on prolog was raise in the forums previously but my understanding is that prolog wasn't just used as a language with syntax created for problem solving and solution making, it was about creating something that had the ability to make decisions.

Almost any programming could be used since it is mainly just list processing however it requires the programming of the CES algo so i would not do it with Prolog even though it might be possible. Stryder, ill contact thee. Maybe we could have a chat this weekend, have you got MSN, ICQ or any chat application or should i just mail you?

It is suggested that prolog can be used to do that... but it hasn't actually been done. All it does is simplify dealing with the syntax... which still just leaves you with a bot.

Persol, you are the kind of person id not want in my team, i had to learn that the hard way. You are too negative for me, i did not have the complete algo when i started (it might have worked but it was not universal). I needed Vincent in my team who is a professional AI programmer. I asked him "what is missing" and he answered. I thought a lil about it and i solved the problems. That is what i do, i am a problem solver. The AI is probably not complete yet either but now i know that it is universal to atleast 85, 90 percents.

If you do not understand my question, how are you capable of producing an entity with language understanding capabilities? You MUST have some knowledge of linguistics and semantics in order to do this. In fact, you must have the most advanced knowledge of linguistics and semantic of anyone on the planet. This is my problem. You are basically talking about the equivalent of saying that you've built a time machine.

that is not the everyday english that i know but i think it means that it can still understand the object even if it only sees a small part of the object, correct?

Well, it can always identify it even if does not have the whole picture however, it might not have enough info in order to do anything intelligent with it.

I was making the statement as general as possible, to include every conceivable situtation. It can identify an apple that's 95% occluded? It can tell the difference between that apple and a picture of an apple that's 95% occluded? It can identify an apple viewed from the top, from the side, from the bottom?

If it can identify it, why wouldn't it have enough info about it to do something with it? By identify, I mean "determine the object's identity," not simply recognize that there is something there.


On the computer, no not really. However it will be pre-programmed so that it will get the right label on the items.
In the real world, i would translate the input and on the output it would be translated to robotic commands (a 1 here and a 0 over there perhaps)

On the computer - yes, really. You are translating the input, period. The AI doesn't have to deal with raw video or sensor data. You're telling it, "Hey, there's a key here."

Yeah, that i had not thought about actually. However it is easiliy changed. Just another topic for empiricial data. Let me ask you. If you were put in command of a nuclear plant without any knowledge, then how would you know which buttons to press if something happened on the first day? You would read a manual, ask somebody or guess, right? Why would my AI do anything else?

Will there be a manual for your AI to read? Someone for it to speak to? That leaves guess, or in other words, make a decision at random, possibly influenced by previous knowlege. Since it must consult its previous knowledge, it has to be stored in some fasion, right? And if the AI never discards any information, won't this knowledge base get pretty big? Didn't you say this AI will be able to run on a single home computer? I'm not talking about storage space, either...I'm talking about computing power, specifically the amount it'll take to search that ever-growing knowledge base.

Incindentally, I recall you saying, "It will do this on the first try and do you know why?" This doesn't sound like guessing to me.

It is of course pre-programmed to some extent. Of course it needs to know how to move. I said that it was Real Artificial Intelligence and not Divine Artificial Intelligence.

First of all, that's not what you said before. You said, "We will start it up with no knowledge." If that's not true, then you shouldn't claim it is.

Second of all - that's fine, let it know how to move. Are you going to also program it with the knowledge of how to insert and turn a key in a lock? If not, then it's not the same as a text simulation (recall that this line of discussion was regarding the difference between a text simulation and a real world test.) And if so, then in either case (text or real world), your AI will need to construct a sequence of basic movements that result in the key being inserted and turned. This is definitely not a trivial task.

On top of all of this - particularly if the AI is given no knowledge, why should it even expect that putting the key in the lock and turning it will open the door? Presumably you might say that this is the only option - there's a door, a key, and a keyhole. If I add more complexity to the problem, like adding various objects to the room, not necessarily key-like, why should the AI pick the key instead of the apple? Or the pencil?

I'm not saying that your AI will never be able to solve the problem of exiting the room. I'm saying you're making grandiose claims that assume no prior knowledge but produce divine results.


Yeah, you are right. What i meant was that everything appear in text and the roof does not appear so it can't be used.

k, what is specific of walls? If you can only see text? Not colors, not material.

Back to my previous statement - you're translating the input. You filtered out some of the information so that your AI doesn't have to deal with it.


However if it is just an empty room then it would try to do something with the roof but only once till it realises that it cannot do anything with it.

And again, you said the AI will get it correct on the first try.

No, the real world is significantly more complex. Simple object recognition is not a trivial matter. How to recognize the key from the texture of the floor? How to recognize the key from different angles? And I'm not even speculating about the complexity in getting the key inserted in the correct manner in the door's key hole.

Well, it would make a 3D model of it and attach a texture to it. If you are talking about recognizing the object and not using it.

To make a 3d model of an object, you first have to recognize it. "Recognize" in this context is not "determine the identity," but rather "distinguish from the background."

If you do not understand my question, how are you capable of producing an entity with language understanding capabilities? You MUST have some knowledge of linguistics and semantics in order to do this. In fact, you must have the most advanced knowledge of linguistics and semantic of anyone on the planet. This is my problem. You are basically talking about the equivalent of saying that you've built a time machine.

I have also been thinking about the time machine, but i have had no progress there yet :p
No, i do not know english as good as you do. I am not saying that i am going to preprogram the linguistics of my AI either, i am saying that it will create its own language. What i mean is that all words that i can affect it in will be in english. but the label that itt has learned all by itself in our world will be a string based on previous numbers of identified items. X = X +1 basically with a string before that number.

was making the statement as general as possible, to include every conceivable situtation. It can identify an apple that's 95% occluded? It can tell the difference between that apple and a picture of an apple that's 95% occluded? It can identify an apple viewed from the top, from the side, from the bottom?

I was making the statement as general as possible, to include every conceivable situtation. It can identify an apple that's 95% occluded? It can tell the difference between that apple and a picture of an apple that's 95% occluded? It can identify an apple viewed from the top, from the side, from the bottom?

thats the plan

If it can identify it, why wouldn't it have enough info about it to do something with it? By identify, I mean "determine the object's identity," not simply recognize that there is something there.

k, lets say that you identidy a nuclear missile. Well of course you can think of the usage area to launch it but you will most likely not think about maybe using the same concepts in nuclear plants now would you?
If it has identified the apple to 100% then it will know what to do with it. If it has identified it to 5 percents then it will probably do nothing with it.

On the computer - yes, really. You are translating the input, period. The AI doesn't have to deal with raw video or sensor data. You're telling it, "Hey, there's a key here."

Yes, somewhat like that. But i am not telling it that "This is the Key"
Im saying "Put this label on the identified item", Why is this a problem for you? I thought that i had explained it that it is easier to read "Key" than "9sa8dy8y42" or something (anything)

Will there be a manual for your AI to read? Someone for it to speak to? That leaves guess, or in other words, make a decision at random, possibly influenced by previous knowlege. Since it must consult its previous knowledge, it has to be stored in some fasion, right? And if the AI never discards any information, won't this knowledge base get pretty big? Didn't you say this AI will be able to run on a single home computer? I'm not talking about storage space, either...I'm talking about computing power, specifically the amount it'll take to search that ever-growing knowledge base.

My database system is very effective. In order to be able to open the door with the key it needs 4 entries. that is one kb.
A human replica would not be able to run on a normal PC (at the moment atleast)

Incindentally, I recall you saying, "It will do this on the first try and do you know why?" This doesn't sound like guessing to me.

Give me those 4 entries (1 kb) and ill have it solve that problem without guessing.
And i know the next question, what will those 4 entries be? That is the limit, i can talk about most things up to that point.

First of all, that's not what you said before. You said, "We will start it up with no knowledge." If that's not true, then you shouldn't claim it is.

I thought that was understood.

Second of all - that's fine, let it know how to move. Are you going to also program it with the knowledge of how to insert and turn a key in a lock? If not, then it's not the same as a text simulation (recall that this line of discussion was regarding the difference between a text simulation and a real world test.) And if so, then in either case (text or real world), your AI will need to construct a sequence of basic movements that result in the key being inserted and turned. This is definitely not a trivial task.

No, it will have a command but it will fill in the "blanks", it will update its X, Y, Z data into that command (this is for the real world simulation)
It will have to construct a sequence, yes. That is one of the key features of my AI.

On top of all of this - particularly if the AI is given no knowledge, why should it even expect that putting the key in the lock and turning it will open the door? Presumably you might say that this is the only option - there's a door, a key, and a keyhole. If I add more complexity to the problem, like adding various objects to the room, not necessarily key-like, why should the AI pick the key instead of the apple? Or the pencil?

Yes, it was decided after i first posted here that it will have the goal to get from point A to point B and therefore it has to open the door. We decided this cause otherwise it might try to do something with the apple and the pear first before it uses the key on the door. If it knows that the door is its objective then it will use the key. That still remains

'm not saying that your AI will never be able to solve the problem of exiting the room. I'm saying you're making grandiose claims that assume no prior knowledge but produce divine results.

Stunning results is the best way to become recognized id say.

And again, you said the AI will get it correct on the first try.

Yes, and it will, believe me it will. It will not get the maze right on the first try. Now that would be godlike. But the door it will solve.

To make a 3d model of an object, you first have to recognize it. "Recognize" in this context is not "determine the identity," but rather "distinguish from the background."

yes, identify is detect the object and create a entry about it.
That would allow it to use it (shape like) but not fully. Id like to say some more here but i cannot do that, i do not like competition especially if someone is smarter than me.

thats the plan

Quite impressive - can you faithfully identify an apple in this setting? How do you know it's not a mutant banana with an edge that happens to look like an apple?

k, lets say that you identidy a nuclear missile. Well of course you can think of the usage area to launch it but you will most likely not think about maybe using the same concepts in nuclear plants now would you?
If it has identified the apple to 100% then it will know what to do with it. If it has identified it to 5 percents then it will probably do nothing with it.

I misunderstood. I thought you were referring to a lack of information about the object that prevented using it, as opposed to a lack of information about the environment.


Yes, somewhat like that. But i am not telling it that "This is the Key"
Im saying "Put this label on the identified item", Why is this a problem for you? I thought that i had explained it that it is easier to read "Key" than "9sa8dy8y42" or something (anything)

I understand labeling and the reasons for it. That's not my problem. You can call it a "key" and the AI won't know anything new about it from that label. My problem is that you're recognizing (not identifying) the key for the AI. You're telling it that there is some object sitting on the ground in front of it. This information is not contained in the real world test.

Let me try a different angle. The text simulation does not contain visual data that the AI will need to process. It contains some descriptive strings. In the text simulation, the AI does not construct those descriptive strings - you do. In a real world test, the AI will construct those descriptions (in a different format, most likely). Therefore, you are translating the input.
The text simulation presumably does not describe everything in the room in the same detail as images of the room would. You'll describe the key in whatever detail you like. You'll describe the door. Will you describe the floor? The walls? Any other objects? Will you do it with enough detail to distinguish very similar objects from each other, no matter how small the difference? You'll probably end up working on the first room of the simulation for more time than you'll work on the AI itself. Because you're not giving the AI all the possible information, you're filtering the input.
Because you translate and filter the input in the text simulation, there are marked differences between it and the real world test. Therefore, your results from the text simulation will not indicate feasiblity in a real world test.

My database system is very effective. In order to be able to open the door with the key it needs 4 entries. that is one kb.
A human replica would not be able to run on a normal PC (at the moment atleast)

Since you won't describe this with any more detail, I'll have to take your word for it. However, I refer you to your statement earlier that this AI will "not need 10 super computers, i do not even need 1. A normal PC would do just fine for my AI, but it would need to be modified a little so that it suites our AI a lil better."

Give me those 4 entries (1 kb) and ill have it solve that problem without guessing.

Yes, and it will, believe me it will. It will not get the maze right on the first try. Now that would be godlike. But the door it will solve.

I can't stand discussions where the other person isn't consistent. Let me quote from your previous posts again.

However if it is just an empty room then it would try to do something with the roof but only once till it realises that it cannot do anything with it.

Yeah, you are right. What i meant was that everything appear in text and the roof does not appear so it can't be used. However if it is just an empty room then it would try to do something with the roof but only once till it realises that it cannot do anything with it.

Do you not see that these two pairs of statements conflict? Either it will do it right the first time, or it won't. If it's adaptable as you say, surely it will be able to perform the same whether there's a roof or not.

Yes, it was decided after i first posted here that it will have the goal to get from point A to point B and therefore it has to open the door. We decided this cause otherwise it might try to do something with the apple and the pear first before it uses the key on the door. If it knows that the door is its objective then it will use the key. That still remains

How does it know point B is beyond the door? Couldn't it just as well be hidden behind the wall opposite the door?

I still have a major problem with how you expect an AI with no knowledge base to magically know that the object is a key, that a key is what it needs to open the door, and how to operate that key in the door.

Here is this same question restated, as I posted in my last post:

On top of all of this - particularly if the AI is given no knowledge, why should it even expect that putting the key in the lock and turning it will open the door? Presumably you might say that this is the only option - there's a door, a key, and a keyhole. If I add more complexity to the problem, like adding various objects to the room, not necessarily key-like, why should the AI pick the key instead of the apple? Or the pencil?

yes, identify is detect the object and create a entry about it.
That would allow it to use it (shape like) but not fully. Id like to say some more here but i cannot do that, i do not like competition especially if someone is smarter than me.

You're not understanding me.

1. Recognize there's an object on the floor (distinguish the object from the background).
2. Examine the object (create your 3D model).
3. From the results of the examination, classify the object.

Creating the model is not the same as realizing there's an object there to begin with. Step 1 is what mouse's reply was asking about.

Quite impressive - can you faithfully identify an apple in this setting? How do you know it's not a mutant banana with an edge that happens to look like an apple?

Already been taken care of. That is really the largest problem in this world.
Lets say you have a can of Coca Cola. You put it in your hand and press it as hard as you can, to you it is now a disformed can of cola but to a robot what is it? it would see it as a new object (unless it can see the text "Coca Cola" and understand that it is a disformed cola can. Well, i have a few concepts that i would integrate in highly advanced robots but yes, it can still fail. But the more it know the more accurate)

I understand labeling and the reasons for it. That's not my problem. You can call it a "key" and the AI won't know anything new about it from that label. My problem is that you're recognizing (not identifying) the key for the AI. You're telling it that there is some object sitting on the ground in front of it. This information is not contained in the real world test.

In the real world it has eyes, it will just need the right hardware.

Therefore, you are translating the input.

Yes, in the simulated reality i am translating it, it is the easiest. in the real world i will probably too but let me just point out that i in no way have to.

Because you translate and filter the input in the text simulation, there are marked differences between it and the real world test. Therefore, your results from the text simulation will not indicate feasiblity in a real world test.

Fine, ill make one translated version and one with randomly created strings just for you ;)

I can't stand discussions where the other person isn't consistent. Let me quote from your previous posts again.

My greatest virtue is that i do not see myself as the smartest and the best. I see myself as one that can think of intelligent short cuts. That is how i have done my math, creating an own way of thinking that suites me better everytime that i find something hard. So, i believe that everybody will know all that i know cause some of you in this discussion might even be professional AI people, but the truth is that people don't. I spent 5 hours explaining my AI, i could had done it in 2 hours but i fogot to say one crucial thing cause i took it for granted.

Do you not see that these two pairs of statements conflict? Either it will do it right the first time, or it won't. If it's adaptable as you say, surely it will be able to perform the same whether there's a roof or not.

No, i meant a empty room that nothing intelligent could be done.

How does it know point B is beyond the door? Couldn't it just as well be hidden behind the wall opposite the door?

well, it has been decided to give it the task to get from coordinate 10,10 to 10;10.

I think we've probably gotten as far as we're going to get in this discussion. You're not quite seeing a few of my major points.

In the real world it has eyes, it will just need the right hardware.

I know that it has visual capabilities in the real world test. What I'm saying is that is has to decide what is an object and what is not in the real world. In the text simulation, you decide what is an object.


Yes, in the simulated reality i am translating it, it is the easiest. in the real world i will probably too but let me just point out that i in no way have to.

How will you prove you don't need to if that's what you do?

Fine, ill make one translated version and one with randomly created strings just for you ;)

No, you're not getting it. I don't care what the strings contain. Whatever you call the object doesn't matter. You can't create random descriptive strings, or they won't describe the object, will they? It's these descriptive strings that mark the major difference between text and real world. I'll say it again - in the text simulation, you describe the object for the AI. In the real world, it has to describe it for itself.

No, i meant a empty room that nothing intelligent could be done.

I see. However, this brings up the other point I made. Just because the AI might be able to exit the first room which is empty except for a key and door...what makes you think it'll be able to leave a room with a key, a door, and twenty other objects, in any reasonable amount of time? If it uses brute force, it could try to use each of the 22 objects on each other. If it has no knowledge, why would it decide to pick up the key and go straight to the door?

well, it has been decided to give it the task to get from coordinate 10,10 to 10;10.

Ok.

No, you're not getting it.

No, i know. I was just joking with thee.

I don't care what the strings contain. Whatever you call the object doesn't matter. You can't create random descriptive strings, or they won't describe the object, will they? It's these descriptive strings that mark the major difference between text and real world. I'll say it again - in the text simulation, you describe the object for the AI. In the real world, it has to describe it for itself.

Well, if they were descriptive strings then i could not replace them could i?
You say Apple, i say "Äpple". You say Key, i say "Nyckel". It still means the same thing, just different languages.

I see. However, this brings up the other point I made. Just because the AI might be able to exit the first room which is empty except for a key and door...what makes you think it'll be able to leave a room with a key, a door, and twenty other objects, in any reasonable amount of time? If it uses brute force, it could try to use each of the 22 objects on each other. If it has no knowledge, why would it decide to pick up the key and go straight to the door?

You have gotten that wrong. There will be 10 objects in room one and it will pick the key and use on the door (after it has identified everything cause we tell it to identify everything before interacting in SC-11)

why would it decide to pick up the key and go straight to the door?

Since it has the goal to get from Point A to Point B and the door is the first obsitcle.

I know that it has visual capabilities in the real world test. What I'm saying is that is has to decide what is an object and what is not in the real world. In the text simulation, you decide what is an object.

k, ill be brief.
Yes

I think we've probably gotten as far as we're going to get in this discussion. You're not quite seeing a few of my major points.

k, next reply. Write down you major points cause i think i have answered all that you have asked.

It is of course pre-programmed to some extent. Of course it needs to know how to move. I said that it was Real Artificial Intelligence and not Divine Artificial Intelligence.
It is interesting to note at this point that humans, and many animals, do learn how to move. We are born with an instinctive urge to learn how to walk as quickly as we can, but have no pre-programmed knowledge of knowing how exactly we should do that.

That i cannot say. It is not full back-propagating. Maybe i should had said that it uses a neural nets concept instead. This only confusses it i see.
How can it be not full back-propagating? At want point does back-propagation stop?

The professional AI developer in my team has already called it "Neural Genetic Natural Language" He, just as me think that it is the core of AI, "mixing" all the other AI and combined creating real AI. (Not all concepts, ill not say which)
Mixing entirely different concepts of AI is quite an effort. Simply tossing them together obviously is not going to work. E.g. GAs producing efficient NNs? It is not going to happen without throwing either an amazing set of hardware at it (which you suggested you didn't need) or a really crafty and resource friendly method of coding a NN, and all variables that can be associated with it (topology, weight modification algorithms, etc.), on a gene set. Of course, I'm quietly ignoring the ridiculous amount of time it will take to tweak such a GA for getting out local optima and such. I'd be afraid of the amount of other problems I will encounter if I start to think longer than two minutes about it.

No, reality. It creates the mimick, i never said that it would use the same words as we do.
How can you create something you are going the mimick? I'll try again: humans learn language and speech from others. An individual human baby e.g. does not learn a language, as we know it, simply by being in an empty room with a key and a door. The child will perhaps associate certain labels to the room, the key, walls, and what ever is there, but aside from that it will be deprived of something as complex and usefull as English or any other language which took centuries, if not millennia, to develop.

However if it was to have audio input then it could mimick the speakers of a conversation and use that data in many fields.
You are making a quantum leap here. Understanding spoken language is very difficult. It takes humans years to fully master it, and with good reason. Take the sound of the word "to" e.g. Based on context it can be associated with a verb "to walk", or, as a superlative (? not sure if this is the correct term) as in "too much", or as a number as in "two keys". If even humans, equipped with an impressive bunch of wetware, need long exposure to a language to figure this stuff out, how do you propose your AI can understand language in a reasonable amount of time with common hardware?

Yes, the only disadvantage is time. I press a button in room one, how the hell could i possibly know that it opened the door in room 5? I dont think there is any way actually except the concept of Origin Tracing, one of the earliy features of my design.
My problem is not with an action leading to an event it can not see or hear. My problem is this: if you associate an action with an event, how do you know which action you are going to couple with which event. While I press the buttons of this keyboard, I'm hearing music, a chopper flying at some distance, people chatting in a corridor and occassionly a phone ringing. I am seeing text appearing in a form, but I also see plants waving in the wind, I see cars driving by. While I'm hitting those buttons, I'm also performing an extensive array of other actions: breathing, regulating digestion, pumping blood around, and many many other issues I am luckily not consciously aware of. In short, while my finger hits a button, a lot of events are happening which I could associate with hitting the button, or perhaps any of the other actions I was performing at the same time. How does your AI decides which events can be associated with which action, and which not? Mind you, to discover this by just trial and error would be inmensly resource expensive, given the amount of events and actions in a real world situation.

k, what is specific of walls? If you can only see text? Not colors, not material.
To answer that, I'd need to know how you textually describe the wall to your AI.

Since it has the goal to get from Point A to Point B and the door is the first obsitcle.
Why? Isn't the wall the most probable first obstruction? Or is point B directly behind the door?

k, next reply. Write down you major points cause i think i have answered all that you have asked.

You've quoted most of the points, but you usually only address certain issues related to the points. Here they are:

1. Key differences between a text simulation and a real world test mean a success in a text simulation does not imply a real world application will succeed.

a. The major difference is with object detection. In a text simulation, you detect the objects for the AI, which it will then proceed to identify based on your descriptions. In a real world test, it must detect them on its own based on video input.

b. A related difference is with object identification. In a text simulation, you describe the objects in some manner the AI can understand. In a real world test, it must determine the objects' characteristics based on video input.

2. An AI with no initial knowledge base is expected to determine that the key is the object it needs to open the door.

a. There are ten objects in the room for which the AI has no predetermined classification. There is absolutely no reason the AI will pick the key first, except by chance.

b. Related is the expectation that the AI will grasp the concept of a key. That is, it will understand what a key is - what it looks like, what it's used for. If the AI has no initial knowledge base, where does this knowledge come from? If you have no knowledge of keys or doors and I handed you a key, would you know what it's used for? No.

3. Practical implementation of the knowledge base

a. Since you won't give more information on your database, I'm unable to pursue this any further. However, I'm naturally skeptical that you can contain and search the amount of knowledge required to produce behavior equivalent to that of a human.


These are my major points. Incidentally, I also have a problem with how you define your goal. In a text simulation, telling the robot to move from coordinate 0,0 to 10,0 might be feasible since the simulation could provide the robot with information on its location. However, in the real world, there is often no such provider of information, except perhaps GPS. How will the robot know that coordinate 10,0 is behind the door? Because that's 10 coordinates in front of it? What if you turned it 90 degrees before you started the AI?

k, ill answer malkiri's questions first.

Ill try to address your problems as well as i can.

The major difference is with object detection. In a text simulation, you detect the objects for the AI, which it will then proceed to identify based on your descriptions. In a real world test, it must detect them on its own based on video input.

Yes, that is right.

A related difference is with object identification. In a text simulation, you describe the objects in some manner the AI can understand. In a real world test, it must determine the objects' characteristics based on video input.

Yes, id say that is correct too.

So, how could it be implemented in the real world? Why does it has too be any difference? No matter which "world" you are in there still remains one constant (However, i cannot tell thee, for all i know you might be working for the "enemy" (all are my enemies till the opposite is proved))
I guess that it is this you would want me to address, right? Contact me and if i believe that i can trust you then ill fill you in on my secret.

There are ten objects in the room for which the AI has no predetermined classification. There is absolutely no reason the AI will pick the key first, except by chance.

that is what you would think, yes. But i try my best to give (whoever) the WOW feeling. Especially important if we try to implement it in millitary applications as we planned to do in the first place.

Related is the expectation that the AI will grasp the concept of a key. That is, it will understand what a key is - what it looks like, what it's used for. If the AI has no initial knowledge base, where does this knowledge come from? If you have no knowledge of keys or doors and I handed you a key, would you know what it's used for? No.

No, i would only be able to guess. So you would say that it is super-human intelligence then? Well, it is conforting to know that my AI is better than humans in some fields atleast since i know that it will not be as good as humans in other.

Since you won't give more information on your database, I'm unable to pursue this any further. However, I'm naturally skeptical that you can contain and search the amount of knowledge required to produce behavior equivalent to that of a human.

Yes, and i like people who are sceptical. It just provides me with a greater challange.
But i would not want people who merely say Yes, the people who sometimes say No and ? are sometimes needed. (atleast on this project so that i can solve all the problems that might occur)

These are my major points. Incidentally, I also have a problem with how you define your goal. In a text simulation, telling the robot to move from coordinate 0,0 to 10,0 might be feasible since the simulation could provide the robot with information on its location. However, in the real world, there is often no such provider of information, except perhaps GPS. How will the robot know that coordinate 10,0 is behind the door? Because that's 10 coordinates in front of it? What if you turned it 90 degrees before you started the AI?

Well, that is a real question.
GPS? maybe in a human replica but no, not otherwise.
No, if it knows the concept of movement and knows that point B is 100 cm in that direction then it could update point B's location accordingly to its movement. It will also memorize the maze.
Bet that i did not address it like you wanted me to niether?

Malikiri, mail me instead.

k, mouse

Why? Isn't the wall the most probable first obstruction? Or is point B directly behind the door?

sure, they are equal. but it cannot interact with the wall. and if it tries then it would fail.

It is interesting to note at this point that humans, and many animals, do learn how to move. We are born with an instinctive urge to learn how to walk as quickly as we can, but have no pre-programmed knowledge of knowing how exactly we should do that.

Are you not forgetting that newborn babies can swim? an abbility they lose at a later point. They innherit the info in their genes on how to walk but it might not be connected fully.

How can it be not full back-propagating? At want point does back-propagation stop?

Mixing entirely different concepts of AI is quite an effort. Simply tossing them together obviously is not going to work. E.g. GAs producing efficient NNs? It is not going to happen without throwing either an amazing set of hardware at it (which you suggested you didn't need) or a really crafty and resource friendly method of coding a NN, and all variables that can be associated with it (topology, weight modification algorithms, etc.), on a gene set. Of course, I'm quietly ignoring the ridiculous amount of time it will take to tweak such a GA for getting out local optima and such. I'd be afraid of the amount of other problems I will encounter if I start to think longer than two minutes about it.

No, you are not getting me. I have a totally unique AI but it is similar to NN, Natural Language, Pattern Recognition. However it can provide the same results as Expert Systems, GA and almost everything you can imagine, it is human. That is all i can say about it.

How can you create something you are going the mimick? I'll try again: humans learn language and speech from others. An individual human baby e.g. does not learn a language, as we know it, simply by being in an empty room with a key and a door. The child will perhaps associate certain labels to the room, the key, walls, and what ever is there, but aside from that it will be deprived of something as complex and usefull as English or any other language which took centuries, if not millennia, to develop.

Yes, how can i? why does it has to learn an language as we learn it when it is not human itself?
k, patterns alter the pattern of thinking accordingly to the environment.

You are making a quantum leap here. Understanding spoken language is very difficult. It takes humans years to fully master it, and with good reason. Take the sound of the word "to" e.g. Based on context it can be associated with a verb "to walk", or, as a superlative (? not sure if this is the correct term) as in "too much", or as a number as in "two keys". If even humans, equipped with an impressive bunch of wetware, need long exposure to a language to figure this stuff out, how do you propose your AI can understand language in a reasonable amount of time with common hardware?

Not really, i just use my universal algorithm in reverse.
This is however an interesting topic and some problems will probably occur but we will only use this later on in (probably) military application so it is an topic for discussion then. But no problems that i cannot solve.

My problem is not with an action leading to an event it can not see or hear. My problem is this: if you associate an action with an event, how do you know which action you are going to couple with which event. While I press the buttons of this keyboard, I'm hearing music, a chopper flying at some distance, people chatting in a corridor and occassionly a phone ringing. I am seeing text appearing in a form, but I also see plants waving in the wind, I see cars driving by. While I'm hitting those buttons, I'm also performing an extensive array of other actions: breathing, regulating digestion, pumping blood around, and many many other issues I am luckily not consciously aware of. In short, while my finger hits a button, a lot of events are happening which I could associate with hitting the button, or perhaps any of the other actions I was performing at the same time. How does your AI decides which events can be associated with which action, and which not? Mind you, to discover this by just trial and error would be inmensly resource expensive, given the amount of events and actions in a real world situation.

That is a great question.
Well, if your first interaction method on a computer (without any errors) are using the mouse and the keyboard then why should you need more empirical data that the keyboard and mouse is doing what you see on the screen? I mean if you already will try to interact by using the buttons then "why change it if it aint broken"?
In a full human replica it would to the full extent as you would imagine. That is all i can say.

To answer that, I'd need to know how you textually describe the wall to your AI.

Dont actually describe the walls since it has no function. But i would describe it "Wall" and that is all that it has to know.
To open the door it has to know "Door", "Key" and that they are objects (object=something that it can see or touch and possibly interact with.) It also needs to know "Unlocked" and "Locked" and that they are the 2 statuses of the door.
The words does not matter since it will be able to use it in the same manner no matter name but i think you all get that by now.


Anything more?

Can we lock this thread? Baal has moved from being ambitious, to lying, to being delusional. Now he's just 'playing along'.

Hell, statements like "Not really, i just use my universal algorithm in reverse" don't deserve to be in a science forum. If I came on here and said I was going to make an AI by waving my magic wand backwards I'd expect it to be closed. Baal is just using pseudo-scientific terms... most of which are used incorrectly.

sure, i do not mind.

ambitious, to lying, to being delusional
Ambitious i can agree with, Lying that i have never done. Delusional, the only thing that i am delusional is when i am tired and see things moving that isn't really there.
Playing Along, yes. Thought that would be a better attitude.

Let me just explain, why it sounds so strange.
I do not have experience in other AI, i came up with my AI all alone. Do you know what CBR is? Well think the CBR technology 3 times as advanced combining some features from NN then you have my AI.
How can you combine some features from NN with CBR? well, if that is what you are interested in hearing then maybe i came to the wrong place in search of good programmers.
"If the facts don't fit the theory, then change the facts"
That is all i have to say.

sure, they are equal. but it cannot interact with the wall. and if it tries then it would fail.
But the point is that it tries. You have no way of saying in advance, if the AI has no initial knowledge about doors and walls, what it would go for first.

I have a totally unique AI but it is similar to NN, Natural Language, Pattern Recognition.
"I have a totally unique computer, it is similar to Object Oriented programming, C++ and web browsing", is a statement equally unintelligible to your statement.

However it can provide the same results as Expert Systems, GA and almost everything you can imagine, it is human. That is all i can say about it.
And based on that utterly unintelligible statement, you claim to have the holy grail of AI.

why does it has to learn an language as we learn it when it is not human itself?
The fact that it needs a bunch of humans and much time to develop a language, does not make it "not human". Learning a language is one of the things that we obviously are capable of, and is often regarded as one of the signs of intelligence.

Not really, i just use my universal algorithm in reverse.
I agree with Persol on this. Do you really mean this seriously, or are you just joking around and having fun here? In the first case, get help and a proper education. In the second case, get lost.

This is however an interesting topic and some problems will probably occur but we will only use this later on in (probably) military application so it is an topic for discussion then. But no problems that i cannot solve.
How do you know that in advance, if you do not know what problems you would encounter?

That is a great question.
No, it was quite a fundamental one. The fact that you have to think about it proofs that your project is in an infant state, if it exists in the first place.

Well, if your first interaction method on a computer (without any errors) are using the mouse and the keyboard then why should you need more empirical data that the keyboard and mouse is doing what you see on the screen?
That's knowledge. Somebody told me how computers work. Nobody has told your AI how keys work.

Dont actually describe the walls since it has no function. But i would describe it "Wall" and that is all that it has to know.
But you'd have to code which actions are allowed on the wall, and which not.

To open the door it has to know "Door", "Key" and that they are objects (object=something that it can see or touch and possibly interact with.) It also needs to know "Unlocked" and "Locked" and that they are the 2 statuses of the door.
That is incredibly simplistic. As Malkiri tried to point out to you, it is a far cry from a real world simulation.

Anything more?
Lots, but I'm afraid there is little use. You do not answer the questions in concrete terms, but rather by:

concatenating AI terms in random order,
by an unjust simplification of the problem presented until you can easily wave it away,
by ignoring the problem presented altogether,
or by stating that you can not tell more out of fear of competition.

I suppose you are indeed in the wrong place if you think you can enlist programmers with such a shaky argument.

I agree with Persol on this. Do you really mean this seriously, or are you just joking around and having fun here? In the first case, get help and a proper education. In the second case, get lost.

Actually, when using data you run the algorithm as usual. When learning from either hearing or seeing you run it roughly in reverse.
Pretty obvious that the opposite from leanrning is usage of learned data.

"I have a totally unique computer, it is similar to Object Oriented programming, C++ and web browsing", is a statement equally unintelligible to your statement.

:)
Well, you have a computer that can do both of those things but somehow you do not see your computer as a holy grail, or do you?

No, it was quite a fundamental one. The fact that you have to think about it proofs that your project is in an infant state, if it exists in the first place.

Just because i say "Great question" does not mean that i have to think about it. It just means that it is one of the questions that actually touch my AI.


I suppose you are indeed in the wrong place if you think you can enlist programmers with such a shaky argument.

well, as you wish. if you actually want to hear anything about the AI then just mail me.
I will stick to my professionals instead.

How do you plan on this identifying object using video?

i deleted my reply to that question. If you want the answer then mail me instead.

Perhaps a question you can answer.

How do you plan to solve a dozen on more complex problems that the field of AI has been completey unable to solve, do it with a normal computer, and do it with random programmers? If you don't want to answer, then fine... but you aren't going to get many volunteers. Your idea is very 'pie in the sky' and unless you can back it up I don't see people wasting thier time on it.

let me first ask you,

Why would i post something that was not true?
Secondly,why would i not post more unless it was true?
Respect can obly be achieved by having actuall proof.
So?

I'm not saying you don't believe it is true. I'm saying that you haven't demonstrated that you actually understand the difficulties and barriers to what you propose.

You are promising the 'holy grail' of AI... yet seem to not see the practicalities that stand in the way. These include:
shape identification via video
3d modeling from shape identification
object pattern matching
how an AI 'without knowledge' picks the right solution on the first try
'good' computer simulation (IE: collision detection and object interaction)
storage method of knowledge learned
method of converting input to data
method of logic (A is B so C is D)
processing speed (how do you do this on a standard computer)
-expontential growth problem. more knowledge leads to slower speed.
language processing

etc, etc, etc.

There are many many many things that your AI has to do, each of which is basically a field in itself. You don't seem to recognize the scale of what you are doing.

If Baal and his team are that dedicated to their cause, then they will most certain do what is necessary to achieve their goal.

Just because there isn't a "HOWTO" or "DUMMIES Guide" to building an A.I. being posted on the board doesn't mean that their intensions of building one aren't genuine.

I would suggest Baal that you might think along the lines of doing this perhaps as a larger project, which you might suggest doesn't have some of the monetary benefits.

Admittedly you would have to e-mail/message me via Hotmail/MSN to get an understanding of how I mean.

If Baal and his team are that dedicated to their cause, then they will most certain do what is necessary to achieve their goal.

Just because there isn't a "HOWTO" or "DUMMIES Guide" to building an A.I. being posted on the board doesn't mean that their intensions of building one aren't genuine.I'm not saying his interest isn't genuine, but that his saying he 'has the answer' isn't genuine. Hard work alone doesn't provide results when you don't they don't even know the scale of what it is they are trying to accomplish.

Stryder, You have been nothing but nice to me. I thank thee and unlike other forums SciForums is a place that i would like to be a member of.

I accept your offer to chat with thee.

Persol, ill mail thee instead.

So, how could it be implemented in the real world?

This is exactly the problem.

Why does it has too be any difference?

Because there's a difference between the real world and text.

that is what you would think, yes. But i try my best to give (whoever) the WOW feeling. Especially important if we try to implement it in millitary applications as we planned to do in the first place.

Again, you don't get it. I'm not saying your AI in particular will not be able to do it. I'm saying any intelligence whatsoever cannot do this on the first try unless it has prior knowledge.

No, i would only be able to guess. So you would say that it is super-human intelligence then? Well, it is conforting to know that my AI is better than humans in some fields atleast since i know that it will not be as good as humans in other.

That's not at all what I was saying. I'm saying your AI will not be able to do it.


Well, that is a real question.
GPS? maybe in a human replica but no, not otherwise.
No, if it knows the concept of movement and knows that point B is 100 cm in that direction then it could update point B's location accordingly to its movement. It will also memorize the maze.
Bet that i did not address it like you wanted me to niether?

No, you didn't. I don't care about movement, although that is a separate issue. I'm talking about simple orientation in relation to the goal.

I don't buy into your idea to warrant spending any more time with it. You're not really answering my questions sufficiently, either because of a language barrier or simple avoidiance because of faults in your concept, not to mention your reluctance to share certain parts. Good luck with your project. Negative as it may sound, I neither believe nor hope you will succeed; the former because I think you're shooting far too high, and the latter because I believe your secrecy will not serve the field of AI, though I understand that different people have different motivations.

Persol, ill mail thee instead.Please PM me. (Basically email within this forum.)

My impression is that you don't grasp the size of what you are trying to do, but I look forward to a few more details. I know basic, C, pascal, and can probably learn something else if you program in that instead.

Thanks.

Ohh the pain the pain... Come on people is surprises me that you don't understand the meaning of AI...
Things to consider.
First AI means human like intelligence. It does not mean intelligence made by humans.
Second. Intelligence is inherent in all turing machines.
Anyone who has ever created an "if then else" statement will have created an intelligent machine.
Baal Zebul. You should stop using the acronym AI because your project is not an AI. You will save your self a lot of grief when selling the project.

malkiri, How to create a fully functional robot (in the real world), that is your question.
Well, i have many conservative people on my crew but all of them are negative in an way that the concept profits from.
If it was not for Vincent who said "No, it lacks [something]" then i would not have come up with everything that i have now. But your just saying "No" and not what it lacks.

Let's just put it like this, i have solved the problem with implementing it into our world. How? Well that will remain secret so that the AI community does not profit from it.

Artificial Intelligence is using pre-programmed data "intelligently"
Whilst i rather say that Real Artificial Intelligence features obtaining that data.

Id say the prmary reason is my inability to trust.
If you ever feel that you know better swedish than i know english then send me a PM. :)
If this was one month ago then i might had said more but one of my members left and stole my AI concept, unfortunatly he is not as clever as me so he is trying to solve the real world integration with Pixel-Based pattern recognition (analysing a image pixel for pixel). So if you ever want somebody to harass then i could give you his hotmail because all your critisism fits what he is doing.

Update:

Need someone who is extremly good at extremly advanced math. We are working on a hard problem for real world integration. We have the concept complete but we need the math correctly in order to be able to code it.

I design strong AI and have a web-site dedicated to that problem:
<a href="http://www.dennisgorelik.com/ai/overview.htm">http://www.dennisgorelik.com/ai/</a>

Leda, I enjoy your questions. They are strait to the point.

What data structures does it (AI) use to hold knowledge?

The core memory consists of two database tables.
1) <a href="http://www.dennisgorelik.com/ai/ConceptTable.htm">Concept table</a>.
2) <a href="http://www.dennisgorelik.com/ai/CauseEffectRelationTable.htm">Cause-effect relation table</a>.

So, every concept can be related to any other concept.
Every relation has a weight.
The higher the weight is, the stronger cause-effect relation between the concepts is.

Just give you a hint about the size of the tables.
For instance, Concept table could have 10 million records (concepts)
Relation table could have 200 million records (cause-effect relations).

Any questions are very welcome! :-)

How are you planning on representing objects?

Every object in the real world can be represented by one concept in AI memory. Actually not just one concept, but concept + many relations to other concepts (and other concepts also relate to the next set of concepts).

<a href="http://www.dennisgorelik.com/ai/Concept.htm">Concept</a> alone holds very small amount of information, but together with references and other concepts anything can be described.

Some concepts in AI memory are connected to <a href="http://www.dennisgorelik.com/ai/PeripheralDevices.htm">peripheral devices</a>.
That solves "Grounding" problem.

Blindman:
Ohh the pain the pain... Come on people is surprises me that you don't understand the meaning of AI...
Things to consider.
First AI means human like intelligence. It does not mean intelligence made by humans.

Er, artificial means constructed, not "human like". Since other animals do not make AIs, we humans are generally forced to try our hands at it if we ever want to see one.

Second. Intelligence is inherent in all turing machines.

Here is a Turing machine:

1. Halt

Is that intelligent? Well, no... it's about as intelligent as a grape. (Probably less - a Turing simulation of a grape would probably be much more complicated.)

Anyone who has ever created an "if then else" statement will have created an intelligent machine.

Eh... that's not really what anyone's talking about. Baal's talking about a relational engine that anticipates a series of actions required to achieve an arbitrary goal in a simulated world. "If then else" isn't going to cut it here.

Baal: Your AI simulations aren't going to tell you anything about building an AI in the real world. Why bother? Why not just start with real-world prototyping? You'll probably learn a lot faster this way.

Dennis Gorelik (if that is your real name)

First, whereas you may be a real person, your AI website is crap - just a series of definitions of words that all refer to one another. I skimmed your documentation and this is all it contained - no suggestions of how your AI is made or what it does, no description of AI theory that couldn't be gotten out of a dictionary.

To be honest, your page looks like it was assembled by a bot. And... not an impressive bot either.

So, just to assuage my fears that you don't know anything, maybe you could answer me this...

Just give you a hint about the size of the tables.
For instance, Concept table could have 10 million records (concepts)
Relation table could have 200 million records (cause-effect relations).

So basically, you have a series of nodes, with paths between them that have certain weights. The trick of determining a germane relation to the series of inputs the robot just received, then, will be to find the collections of nodes that relate to the input, that have the highest total weight to their paths.

I believe in school we called this the Traveling Salesperson Problem. The main problem with this is that the complexity of the problem is N!, which grows very quickly as N grows.

This means that, in a set of - say - twenty fully interconnected nodes, finding the optimum solution by direct comparison means testing

2432902008176640000

possible paths.

Assuming that you can test one of these every nanosecond (which would be pretty fast), that means the calculation of these solutions would take you 2432902008.17664 seconds

= 40548366.802944 minutes

= 675806.1133824 hours

= 28158.5880576 days

= 77.1468166 years.

So, expect to die of old age waiting for your robot to process its first few inputs.

Incidentally, if there were 21 fully interconnected objects, expect this problem to take (77 * 21) = 1617 years to solve. 22? (1617 * 22) = 35574 years.

So, how do you intend to breeze past the mathematical problem (solving NP-complete problems within a reasonable time) that the entire world is still struggling with?

Take your time...

(Baal... do you have a solution? The fast expansion of relational systems is one of the biggest problems in AI, so you'd make a lot of people really happy if you came up with an answer.)