Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 23:13:13 03/14/01
Go up one level in this thread
On March 15, 2001 at 00:42:03, Christophe Theron wrote: >On March 14, 2001 at 16:14:02, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >>On March 14, 2001 at 12:11:41, Fernando Villegas wrote: >> >>>Well, Bruce, your answer widens the scope of the debate. To begin with, the >>>concept of intelligence as something proper of an entity capable of intelligent >>>behaviour does not solve the problem as much intelligence as such is not clearly >>>stated first. Sounds a little bit like a circular reasonning. Nevertheless I >> >>I consider that for these purposes, intelligence is the ability to provide good >>solutions to the majority of problems inside a difficult and wide problem >>domain. > > >I can still see some circularity here in the definition of "good" in the context >of your sentence. > >Am I just splitting hairs, or isn't it something that has to do with the >basement of the problem? I don't think it is circular. There isn't a clear dividing line between what problem is complex enough, and what competence is high enough, but that's not necessarily fatal. Perhaps this can be placed on a continuum and the problem disappears. So a system is more intelligent if it provides better solutions in wider domains. bruce > > > > Christophe > > > >>A pocket calculator can provide good solutions across a wide problem domain, but >>the domain is not difficult. >> >>I can't think of an example where a hard problem is solved through specific >>coding, but I'm sure they exist. >> >>I think that a lot of things that are in the AI category are things that meet my >>definition. For example, speech recognition, military image processing, >>advanced database searching, etc. >> >>All of these are difficult problems that require general solutions. >> >>bruce >> >>>concur with the sheer fact that all this is a matter of behaviour in certain >>>frames of reference. Probably a way to approach the problem is, then, to reject >>>from the beginning the idea of intelligence as some sustantive, specific entity >>>we can define in a sentence. Maybe it is more like a cluster of certain >>>behavioral abilities in different levels and empirical ocasions. In that case >>>even such a mechanical thing as to remember is fundamental. And certainly the >>>capacity to calculate accurately inside a system of rules is, as well, a kind of >>>intelligence. And the highest one would be the creative endeavour of the so >>>called genuses that change the entire frame of rererence. If this is so, then, >>>yes, we could say program show intelligence in some level. >>>Cheers >>>Fernando
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.