From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!csd.unb.ca!morgan.ucs.mun.ca!nstn.ns.ca!news.cs.indiana.edu!att!linac!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ncar!noao!amethyst!organpipe.uug.arizona.edu!NSMA.AriZonA.EdU!bill Tue May 12 15:48:22 EDT 1992
Article 5338 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!csd.unb.ca!morgan.ucs.mun.ca!nstn.ns.ca!news.cs.indiana.edu!att!linac!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ncar!noao!amethyst!organpipe.uug.arizona.edu!NSMA.AriZonA.EdU!bill
>From: bill@NSMA.AriZonA.EdU (Bill Skaggs)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Quantitative measure of Intelligence
Message-ID: <1992Apr29.170850.21627@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu>
Date: 29 Apr 92 17:08:50 GMT
References: <1992Apr23.083023.14050@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg> <erich.704535714@dehn>
Sender: news@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu
Reply-To: bill@NSMA.AriZonA.EdU (Bill Skaggs)
Organization: Center for Neural Systems, Memory, and Aging
Lines: 21

In article <erich.704535714@dehn> erich@dehn.mth.pdx.edu 
(Erich Boleyn) writes:
>
>   There have been several attempts to use information density to
>measure intelligence level.  
>
  Since the highest information density is achieved by total
randomness, this does not seem like a very promising approach.

  Furthermore:  intelligence is an essentially teleological
notion.  It is the ability to solve problems or reach goals.
Information theory contains no teleological element, so by
itself it is inadequate.

  On the other hand, dynamical systems theory does contain
a quasi-teleological element (e.g. the notions of stability
and of attractors).  Maybe it would be possible to combine
dynamical systems theory and information theory to come up
with some useful ideas . . .

	-- Bill


