I suppose there are lots of papers and results that fall into the "only curve fitting" bucket, but there are many exciting results in recent years that have been curve fitting + X, where ANNs formed part of a system with other components. While none of these approach the level of something you could have a meaningful conversation with (which was an ambitious bar introduced in the article) some do kind of consider multiple actions, work through consequences of each, and pick a single action. This looks a lot like a crude form of reasoning about causality and hypotheticals, though not quite along the lines Pearl would like to see. But they typically do that in the context of a specific task, with an enumerable set of available actions.
AI is mostly about curve fitting (2018)
11–20 of 192 posts
Re: AI is mostly about curve fitting (2018)
#12Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was say fundamentally no -- and Douglas Hofstadter is probably the foremost spokesperson against intelligence being curve fitting. General intelligence is primarily about developing useful conceptual categories (not mapping to existing ones) and drawing cause-and-effect inferences that assist us in achieving goals . Curve fitting is just another name for pattern recognition, mapping to previously defined categories…
We dont know anything about AGI, and we arent sure how it would work. Its impossible to make assertions like this
[deleted]
Re: AI is mostly about curve fitting (2018)
#13shhh, let's keep it that way
Re: AI is mostly about curve fitting (2018)
#14Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was say fundamentally no -- and Douglas Hofstadter is probably the foremost spokesperson against intelligence being curve fitting. General intelligence is primarily about developing useful conceptual categories (not mapping to existing ones) and drawing cause-and-effect inferences that assist us in achieving goals . Curve fitting is just another name for pattern recognition, mapping to previously defined categories…
We dont know anything about AGI, and we arent sure how it would work. Its impossible to make assertions like this
we don't know everything, but we definitely know something about current ML, and we can indeed speculate and make some educated guesses about AGI. for a random comment on the internet, that contained some interesting information. of course, an actual implementation of AGI might be anything, but the comment was broader than that
Re: AI is mostly about curve fitting (2018)
#15So, one view of AI is that is is machine learning. Another view is that it consists of automated process. So, if expert systems count as AI, or if production rule systems count as AI, then pretty much any handcrafted if-then statement counts as AI. And, so too might any automated process..
This is has the advantage of recognizing how human intelligence can be automated and aggregated into system processes. And, the disadvantage that the boundaries of the concept start exploding.
I like cybernetics for providing a clear model of what constitutes intelligence -- a feedback loop between perception and action that achieves goals or lowers local entropy.
And, cybernetic systems can be artificial, natural or a mix
Re: AI is mostly about curve fitting (2018)
#16Well, most of science is also just curve fitting.
Re: AI is mostly about curve fitting (2018)
#17I'd say this is outdated. Since its publication, transfer learning has really started to pick up speed.
Taking a model trained in one subject, and reapplying it to build out new vertical is pretty much how children learn new things.
We'll have models using models to train new models sooner rather than later.
If a program can create it's own curve functions and decide which one to use to evaluate a problem, is it that much different than a brain?
Re: AI is mostly about curve fitting (2018)
#18shhh, let's keep it that way
Why? Afraid of Skynet taking over?
Re: AI is mostly about curve fitting (2018)
#19Depending on how complex a curve, and how many dimensions it is in, couldn't you argues that is essentially what our brains do as well? Not that I am defending the massive hype field that is ML today, but curve fitting is a form of intelligence.
First, no AI that I know of has at its disposal a full blown model of the world it operates in, whereas most human brains do, and even if the model is imperfect, it is capable of producing fairly accurate simulations (what-if scenarios). Second, deep learning model, however much we'd like to think they do, aren't capable of doing proper causal inference in a general setting (that is, within the confines of the model)…
But all this is curve-fitting in a more general sense - fitting the curve of life, gene reproduction. So it is still curve fitting, it is just that a pottential AGI is certainly not in the hypothesis space of current deep learning models, and those cannot reach AGI by curve-fitting.
Re: AI is mostly about curve fitting (2018)
#20Depending on how complex a curve, and how many dimensions it is in, couldn't you argues that is essentially what our brains do as well? Not that I am defending the massive hype field that is ML today, but curve fitting is a form of intelligence.
First, no AI that I know of has at its disposal a full blown model of the world it operates in, whereas most human brains do, and even if the model is imperfect, it is capable of producing fairly accurate simulations (what-if scenarios). Second, deep learning model, however much we'd like to think they do, aren't capable of doing proper causal inference in a general setting (that is, within the confines of the model)…
"casual inference in a general setting" is just your brain running an input through it's existing thought and decision processes with a low threshold for a passing answer.
So an ML model running an input through a collection of other models to see if it gets a reasonable answer.