The mathematics of artificial intelligence.

Discussion in 'Intelligence & Machines' started by Counter, Feb 4, 2017.

  1. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,096
    If you are an atheist I apologize for my presumption that you have religious or spiritual world views.

    The actual response was to your question and narrow interpretation of the definition of "species".

    The bold is only to make it more readable. At least for me.
     
    Last edited: Jun 29, 2017
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. river

    Messages:
    9,793
    Spiritual , not religious ever , clear ? I hope so.

    What , in bold , made what more readable?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,096
    Can you explain the difference to me? I am seriously interested. I am atheist , but a Native American lady once told me I had a good spirit in me. I was flattered by the compliment, even as I did not understand the metaphor.
    And it might be pertinent in context of AI.
    To me? Just the letters. The definition speaks for itself .
     
    Last edited: Jun 29, 2017
    danshawen likes this.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,942
    I would agree with her assessment (the good spirit).

    It took a lot of research on my part to discern that there really were tw distinct camps in artificial intelligence engineering. The Symbolic Logic camp described in the OP has diminished because computational algorithms to mimic animal behavior simply lock up when confronted with real world problems. Evading a predator or finding sustenance is something that animals like reptiles with narrow brains possessing only amygdala accomplish with relative ease, and this is because they don't hesitate to calculate the hyperbolic cosecant of the angle of the perch they need to jump from. Any animal that did would rapidly become another animal's meal.

    I know quite a bit about real world artificial intelligence because I was on the engineering team that developed team Ensco's DEXTER (Deployable Extreme Terrain Enabled Robot) for the DARPA Grand Challenge 2005 to autonomously navigate the Mojaje Desert. We did well except for four flat tires rendered into chewing gum by the Mojave heat, and also because we tested DEXTER to death in Luray, Virginia before the race. Like Thrun's team, DEXTER used a behaviorist approach.

    We all cheered when Sebastian Thrun's Stanford team beat out Red Whitaker's (Canegie Melon's team) brute programmer approach to map every rock on the desert floor. Thrun's obstacle avoidance approach was adaptive, which is the approach of the BEHAVIORIST camp of artificial intelligence.
     
    Last edited: Jun 29, 2017
    Write4U likes this.
  8. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,096
    Just a thought, prompted by the nine brained octopus.
    Does an AI have to consist of a single unit with just one main processor?

    What about a set of interactive AIs, each programmed for a specific ability of observation and analysis then, sending it's info to the main body which then puts all the info together to execute a specific course of action.

    Seems that a main body accompanied by several airborne semi autonomous observation units would extend its range of decision making.

    You mentioned mapping the terrain. What better than an semi autonomous airborne unit with a large field of observation and ability to calculate the shortest, least problematic route which is then sent to the main unit for integration with additional information from other units, which would allow for precise and near instantaneous efficient response by the main body.

    It seems that the octopus functions that way, eight semi-autonomous tentacles , each with a small brain, sending information to the main brain for final decision making.

    This is how an octopus can figure out how to unscrew the cap of a jar to get to food inside. A remarkable feat of exploration and testing for a way to get to food that is in effect securely locked up.

    Or even using a tentacle to measure circumference of a small opening for size that will allow the main part of the body to squeeze through, rather trying to force itself through and possibly getting stuck in the process.

    Can we learn from such abilities for use in an AI?
     
    Last edited: Jun 29, 2017
    danshawen likes this.
  9. danshawen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,942
    In animals, sensory inputs are so tightly integrated with brain function that it can be difficult to discern where the sensory apparatus ends and processing neurons begin.

    The advantage of that became apparent to us in the Grand Challenge. When a tire blew out, suddenly the steering calibration too was finished, the log files showed. Because the steering calibration was not adaptive, there was no longer any means to avoid hitting other obstacles (and flattening more of those sticky tires in the process). It finally struck a several hundred year old Joshua tree, at which point DARPA race officials had to hit the 'kill' switch. Before then, over 80 miles into the race, we were finishing with the fastest split times. Just a year before, no one had finished and Carnegie Melon had gone the furthest, all of about 0.7 miles into the race.

    If a predator gouges out one of your eyes, you still have a chance to do something to evade or otherwise mitigate the situation, just as a well engineered mobile AI can switch to compensate using other sensors, if necessary, should a primary one fail.

    It was a rich experience. After the race, Anthony Levandowski (Google driverless car, Uber) briefly joined our team for the following year's Urban challenge. He showed us the advantages of the rotating LIDAR. I was recently relieved to read, at least Anthony managed to leave Uber without being the subject of a trade secrets lawsuit from Google. Anthony is a bright young engineer, and did more than anyone else to make safe driverless cars a reality.
     
    Last edited: Jun 29, 2017
  10. river

    Messages:
    9,793
    Hmmm......it seems that our awareness of the without is narrowing all the time .
     
  11. Counter Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    459
    ...but put the bolts in the correct combination...?
     
  12. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,096
    As Max Tegmark explained in a previous link I posted
    All mathematical functions in the universe can be reduced to 32 numbers and a handful of equations (from which all values can be calculated). That's all. The problem does not lie in the assembly of functional systems. The problem lies in the probabilistic evolution of sensory cells and complex neural networks capable of processing sensory information. This is a fractal function, another fundamentally simple but extremely efficient mathematical function, which can be found throughout the universe, no matter where you look.

    The first cell was a bio-chemical membrane filled with 99% salt water A water molecule is 1 oxygen atom combined with 2 hydrogen atoms. Most of life (if not all life) is made up from mainly H2O. It seems to be a common denominator of all life on earth.
    , wiki.

    And as Robert Hazen explained it in a previous link I posted.
    On earth we estimate the presence of some 6000 different chemicals. So the problem does not lie in the number of available chemicals. The trick was the right chemicals coming together in just the right order in the right environment. And as the early earth was in constant state of change, that becomes a mathematically probabilistic event. Apparently it took the earth about 600,000 years to find the right combination of a self duplicating cell string of organic molecules.
    , wiki.
    You need to look at the incredible variety of life that exists or has existed, from single celled organisms, such as the brainless slime mold to large brained slugs such as the cuttlefish and finally to the larger brained vertebrates, culminating in the very large brained humans.

    As Hazen explained, given the enormous combinatory richness of chemicals on earth and the enormous timespans allowed for chemical reactions, the appearance of life is not by either 100% certainty or by pure chance, but within a range of probabilities.
     
    Last edited: Jul 5, 2017
  13. Counter Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    459
    All mathematical functions being reduced to thirty-two? Is that like:

    (10×10)÷(1÷(10×10))

    ...or...

    100÷0.01
    10000÷1
    10000

    ...or...

    10÷0.1

    The divider is a hundredth of the divisor, which is a hundred times larger. I believe the result is infinite and produces every possible answer:

    10÷0.1
    100÷0.01
    1000÷0.001

    This is identical to another posters writings in another thread.
     
  14. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,096
    You clearly don't understand mathematics. Take the binary system 0 and 1. Theoretically we can create any number or language with just those two numbers. It would take a computer with a very large memory, but theoretically that's all a computer needs. The fundamental shape of a fractal is a triangle, just three sides, from which the most fantastical shapes can be formed.

    All other numbers are invented for convenience.

    I really would suggest reading Max Tegmark's work. He is a theoretical mathematician and cosmologist. I have posted the following links before, but I believe they bear reposting, with moderator permission of course.


    And if you want to see the power of the number 4/3, and the many ways it can be represented, take a look at this
     
  15. Counter Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    459
    All those parts of a computer assembled in every possible combination will produce a computer. One combination will produce that DaveC. The Berkofsky principle.
     
  16. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,237
    The pianist??
     
  17. Counter Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    459
    I believe not.
     
  18. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,237
    The photographer then...
     
  19. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,096
    I would suggest to add the word science to your search, i.e. Berkofsky science.

    You will find several references to Berkofskys in the field of science

    Adding the area of search helps in narrowing the selection of possible candidates

    p.s. I tried Berkofsky's Principle and that yielded an interesting result.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2017
  20. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,237
    'fraid that's no better.
    1. Mike Berkofsky's best photograph
    2. Berkofsky, Axel - The Church Bookroom
    3. Fashion's Most Voluminous Silhouettes for Spring 2017
    4. Understanding China Today - An Exploration of Politics
    5. The Desert Experience in Israel: Communities, Arts, Science
    6. Climate and circulation of the tropics
    7. Rebecca Ramsey and Stella Berkofsky - Archive - NYMag

    I don't even know what kind of science I should look for.

    I presume this guy Berkovsky's contribution to science is 'How To Fly Under Google Search's Radar'.

    Earth? Counter wasn't specific.
     
  21. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,096
    Ah, perhaps the name is Bergofsky
    http://bigglemanssafe.blogspot.com/

    I believe the trail may lead to Brown University (computer science department)
     
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2017
  22. river

    Messages:
    9,793
    Spiritual means that you have or that there is something more than the physical , life energy .

    Religion is a belief system that is cultural .
     
  23. Write4U Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,096
    And based on the notion that there is something more than the physical, i.e. life energy.

    I can empathize with that intuitive assumption. But I have come to accept that where there is life energy, there is also death energy.

    If we translate that in a mathematical formula (the value of) the life numerator is cancelled out by (the value of) the death numerator and we just end up with the functions of the energy operand.

    Thus the term energy is sufficient to explain all universal phenomena. I believe the theory of "conservation of energy" might be related to this, both physically and meta-physically..
     
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2017

Share This Page