111–120 of 145 posts
Eventually the approach would be rediscovered (but not recuperated) by the database field desparate for 'new' research topics.
We might see a revival now that transformets can front and backend the hard edges of the knowledge based tech, but it will remain to be seen wether scaled monolyth systems like Cyc are the right way to pair.
This is a pretty good article. I was one of the first hires on the Cyc project when it started at MCC and was at first responsible for the decision to abandon the Interlisp-D implementation and replace it with one I wrote on Symbolics machines. Yes, back then one person could write the code base, which has long since grown and been ported off those machines. The KB is what matters anyway. I built it so different peop…
Yes, back then one person could write the code base
A coworker of mine who used to work at Symbolics told me that this was endemic with Lisp development back in the day. Some customers would think there was a team of 300 doing the OS software at Symbolics. It was just 10 programmers.
Or for quality checks during training?
I was born in late USSR and my father is software engineer. We had several books that were not available for "general public" (they were intended for libraries of science institutions). One of the book was, as I understand now, abridged translation of papers from some "Western" AI conference. And there were description if EURISCO (with claims that it not only "win some game" but also that it "invented new structure o…
I was born in late USSR and my father is software engineer. We had several books that were not available for "general public" (they were intended for libraries of science institutions). One of the book was, as I understand now, abridged translation of papers from some "Western" AI conference. And there were description if EURISCO (with claims that it not only "win some game" but also that it "invented new structure o…
>Looks like such systems are good for generating marketing texts, but can not be used as diagnosticians by definition. That's not true https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10425828/ >Why did all these (slice of) world model approaches dead? Because they don't work
I was born in late USSR and my father is software engineer. We had several books that were not available for "general public" (they were intended for libraries of science institutions). One of the book was, as I understand now, abridged translation of papers from some "Western" AI conference. And there were description if EURISCO (with claims that it not only "win some game" but also that it "invented new structure o…
Cyc is one of those bad ideas that won't die, and which keeps getting rediscovered on HN. Lenat wasted decades of his life on it. Knowledge graphs like Cyc are labor intensive to build and difficult to maintain. They are brittle in the face of change, and useless if they cannot represent the underlying changes of reality.
FWIW, KG's don't have to be brittle. Or, at least they don't have to be as brittle as they've historically been. There are approaches (like PROWL[1]) to making graphs probabilistic so that they're asserting subjective beliefs about statements, instead of absolute statements. And then the strength of those beliefs can increase or decrease in response to new evidence (per Bayes Theorem). Probably the biggest problem with this stuff is that it tends to be crazy computationally expensive.
Still, there's always the chance of an algorithmic breakthrough or just hardware improvements bringing some of this stuff into the real of practical.
Related: https://blog.funcall.org//lisp/2024/03/22/eurisko-lives/
I was born in late USSR and my father is software engineer. We had several books that were not available for "general public" (they were intended for libraries of science institutions). One of the book was, as I understand now, abridged translation of papers from some "Western" AI conference. And there were description if EURISCO (with claims that it not only "win some game" but also that it "invented new structure o…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lenat was able to produce superhuman performing AI in the early 1980s [1]. [1] https://voidfarer.livejournal.com/623.html You can label it "bad idea" but you can't bring LLMs back in time.
Why didn't it ever have the impact that LLMs are having now? Or that DeepMind has had? Cyc didn't pass the Turing Test or become superhuman chess and go players. Yet it's had much more time to become successful.
Google has its own Knowledge Graph, with billions of daily views, which is wider but more shallow version of Cyc. It is unclear if LLM user facing impact surpassed that project.