Re: The skill of learning skills.

On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 19:11:17 GMT, Risujin <risujin@xxxxxxxxxxx> in
comp.ai.philosophy wrote:

>Lester Zick wrote:
>> On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 01:08:09 GMT, Risujin <risujin@xxxxxxxxxxx> in
>> comp.ai.philosophy wrote:
>>
>>>JGCASEY wrote:
>>>>So maybe it is more than just adding skills, maybe
>>>>it is adding a particular type of skill. Maybe a
>>>>skill for adding skills? That is the ability to learn
>>>>how to do things all by itself as a result of some
>>>>internal needs and experience with its "world".
>>>
>>>If we define intelligence as the skill of learning skills, we arrive at
>>>a gradual definition for intelligence. It is easy to see how a system
>>>may be capable of learning some kinds of skills but not others. The
>>>breadth/variety of learnable skills and their relevance to achieving the
>>>program's goal determines the degree of intelligence.
>>>
>>>Now we need to define a skill, skill variety, and what exactly we mean
>>>by learning a skill. If we think of a skill as a state operator...:
>>>
>>>* A skill is a procedure for inducing something to transition from one
>>>state to another. In other words, a set of instructions which the system
>>>is capable of following that predictably produces certain changes in the
>>>environment.
>>>
>>>* A skill can be of any level of coarseness. We don't necessarily need
>>>to specify every action in detail. We can imagine abstract skills such
>>>as "drive a car" and reason with them without referring to sub-skills
>>>("start the car").
>>>
>>>* The definition of having learned a skill is trivial in this
>>>case--either the system can or cannot carry out the procedure. We don't
>>>necessarily need to constrain how the system carries out or acquires
>>>procedures.
>>>
>>>* The power of a system can be measured in terms of the range of goals
>>>it is capable of achieving compared with the theoretical range of goals
>>>a system with the same inputs/outputs could possibly achieve.
>>>
>>>* The intelligence of a system can be measured in terms of the range of
>>>skills it is capable of acquiring compared to the range of skills
>>>theoretically possible for it to perform. The intelligence of a system
>>>is its capacity for increasing its power over the environment.
>>>
>>>Curiously, with this definition a static skill set would imply that the
>>>intelligence of a system decreases as its power increases. Only learning
>>>skills which expand the potential skill set of a system increase its
>>>intelligence.
>>>
>>>An intelligent system would only require processing power to match human
>>>intelligence for time-constrained tasks. If we limit the domain of
>>>problems to non-timed goals, there is no reason at least a marginally
>>>intelligent system could not be built on a home PC today.
>>
>> You know, Risujin, let me run something by you here. Let's assume for
>> the sake of argument that you have a pretty good insight into what's
>> wrong with contemporary academic approaches to intelligence. And
>> you others are motivated by goodness and the search for mechanical
>> explanations of intelligence.
>>
>> So you begin by guessing at some solution. Now the problem is not that
>> you begin by guessing because all we can do is guess at the beginning.
>> The problem is that instead of demonstrating that your "skill" in fact
>> represents the general solution to intelligence, you simply define it
>> and then go off and systematize it as if you had already demonstrated
>> it. Then you will subsequently become embroiled in endless arguments
>> with those who disagree.
>
>Maybe I should've made it more explicit but I wasn't actually going for
>a mechanical or any other kind of solution to the general intelligence
>problem. If you read carefully, the skills system I proposed falls far
>short of defining a mechanism. What I was suggesting is instead a
>possible measure of intelligence as an alternative to "we'll know it
>when we see it".

Okay. But how is your possible measure of intelligence superior to
"we'll know it when we see it"? All the different schools of thought
seem to have their own measure of what they're looking for in smarts.

>> There is no argument that "skill" represents a necessary component
>> of intelligence only whether it is intelligence regardless of how it's
>> defined. You say it is; others say it isn't that "timing" is much more
>> basic or environmental manipulation.
>>
>> I don't say this to discourage you from guessing only to suggest that
>> what you should be guessing at is how to prove whatever it is you may
>> guess is the solution to intelligence in mechanical terms. And to me
>> that means showing alternatives to whatever you guess at are wrong.
>> And that means showing that alternatives are self contradictory. Then
>> you'll have something definitive to hang your hat on besides endless
>> arguments and speculation.
>
>A mechanism for producing/conforming to the behavior I describe above is
>the ultimate goal here but I'm not claiming to have anything remotely
>close to it now.

But there are plenty of people who do make exactly that claim. You
seem to disagree with them. So how does your suggestion contradict
what they claim?

~v~~

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Gothic II gold
    ... "Comeback when you have more learning points." ... Everything that improves your character (attributes, combat skills, magic ... By "combat skills" we are refering to your 1 handed or 2 handed weapon ... spend learning points on strength before you start spending points on 1H or ...
    (comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg)
  • Re: Gothic II gold
    ... "Comeback when you have more learning points." ... Everything that improves your character (attributes, combat skills, magic ... By "combat skills" we are refering to your 1 handed or 2 handed weapon ... spend learning points on strength before you start spending points on 1H ...
    (comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg)
  • Re: Whats your favorite cake & icing?
    ... >>your initial learning to a narrow range (of materials, techniques, ... >>to escape from in the long run and develops skills along a particular ... >I had experienced and seen similar individuals that have narrow range ...
    (rec.food.baking)
  • Re: I played Gothic II for the first time last night.
    ... but I figure learning even 20% of the skills is going to ... be a challenge (financially, apart from learning points). ... Seems to need teeth or stings or something to make poison ... ... Even that isn't going to work for the Dragon I guess and Dragons.). ...
    (comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg)
  • Re: Cool visual illusion
    ... > Learning systems require an adequate underlying ... > genetic infrastructure. ... you had was the preprocessors of a frog. ... lower level skills. ...
    (comp.ai.philosophy)