Newsgroups: comp.ai
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!olea
From: olea@netcom.com (Michael Olea)
Subject: Re: a (very!) short bilattice primer
Message-ID: <oleaDAxE6n.Dv2@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <3ss4p6$ocr@pith.uoregon.edu> <3st38v$oes@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 1995 08:27:59 GMT
Lines: 23
Sender: olea@netcom17.netcom.com

philbella@aol.com (Phil Bella) writes:

>In article Message-ID: <3ss4p6$ocr@pith.uoregon.edu>
>ginsberg@t.uoregon.EDU (Matthew L. Ginsberg) wrote:

>>Hope this helps to whet people's appetites ... if you're interested in
>>learning more, the bilattice papers are available (in postscript) from
>>t.uoregon.edu.
>>
>>						Matt Ginsberg

>Can a bilattice be used to construct a truly general learning machine?  OK
>fine, I may be asking too much.  Can it be used to create a learning chess
>program that can eventually play chess at a beginner (I'm trying to be as
>fair as I can be here) level?  If the answer is no, then bilattices are
>irrelevant to true AI, i.e., they are crap.

>Phil

	That's rediculous.  I play a good game of chess, but many of
my friends do not - I don't think of them as "crap".   Anyhow, it looks
like bilattices are better suited to summarize the annotations to a game
rather than play a game of chess.
