Newsgroups: comp.ai
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!scramble.lm.com!news.math.psu.edu!chi-news.cic.net!cs.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!academ!news.sesqui.net!imci2!imci3!imci4!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.inc.net!news.us.world.net!ns2.mainstreet.net!bug.rahul.net!rahul.net!a2i!in-news.erinet.com!netcom.com!nagle
From: nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle)
Subject: Re: Minsky's Future of AI Technology, was: How is AI going?
Message-ID: <nagleDo55pz.3v3@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <nagleDo1L3z.4wu@netcom.com> <4i2cf5$86v@ra.nrl.navy.mil>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 1996 06:22:47 GMT
Lines: 35
Sender: nagle@netcom11.netcom.com

pitre@n5160d.nrl.navy.mil (Richard Pitre) writes:
>In article <nagleDo1L3z.4wu@netcom.com> nagle@netcom.com (John Nagle) writes:
>> drt@MCS.COM (Donald Tveter) writes:
>> >>(This is Minsky, right?)
>> >>However, progress has been slow in other areas, for example, in the
>>
>>  <stuff deleted>
>>
>>      This is on point.  Too much of AI still revolves around trying
>> to reduce problems to some semi-linguistic form, like predicate
>> calculus or rules, and crunching on that.  

>I guess the idea here might be expressed by the assertion  that AI is about  
>intelligent behavior  and  that intelligent behavior includes, but is not  
>limited to, intelligent language behavior. Nevertheless, AI is either  
>implemented in software(using a language) or in hardware whose behavior can be 
>emulated using  software. If this isn't true in some cases, then I'm interested  
>in hearing about it. I would be particularly interested in how it is that the  
>behavior of such systems can be "described" or analysed. 

>I agree that it is futile to attempt to talk about what, by "definition",  
>cannot be talked about.

     No, no.  This isn't comp.ai.philosophy.  There are approaches to
AI that aren't linguistic in nature.  Some work I like is Brooks' early
work, Moravec's certainty grids and the automatic driving work based
on them, the phase-locking in Randall Beer's insect brains, Raibert's
balance stuff, and Reynolds' flocking.  All these are examples of
behavior control systems that are fundamentally non-linguistic and
don't use predicate-based logic.

					John Nagle


					John Nagle
