addressalign-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcameraccwcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-checkcircle-with-crosscircle-with-pluscrossdots-three-verticaleditemptyheartexporteye-with-lineeyefacebookfolderfullheartglobegmailgooglegroupshelp-with-circleimageimagesinstagramFill 1linklocation-pinm-swarmSearchmailmessagesminusmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1ShapeoutlookpersonJoin Group on CardStartprice-ribbonShapeShapeShapeShapeImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartickettrashtriangle-downtriangle-uptwitteruserwarningyahoo

New York Artificial Intelligence Forum Message Board › Syntience/Artificial Induction

Syntience/Artificial Induction

Rob
user 6264915
Group Organizer
New York, NY
Is anyone in the group familiar with these guys? With details? Analysis? Contact me if so.
Stuart Mason D.
sdambrot
New York, NY
Post #: 29
Artificial Intuition (not Induction) http://artificial-int...­ and Syntience http://syntience.com/...­ are both headed by Dr. Monica Anderson, an Assistant Professor in the Department of Computer Science and head of the Distributed Autonomy Lab http://robotics.cs.ua...­ at the University of Alabama http://robotics.cs.ua...­.

Artificial Intuition (AN) is a biology- and evolution-inspired algorithmic model of intelligence based on nested prediction http://artificial-int...­. As you might expect, Anderson mentions Jeff Hawkins (in the right sidebar, not the main text) and links to his TED video http://www.ted.com/in...­. Syntience is a corporation formed to commercialize Artificial Intuition, which is described as developing a linguistic approach to document understanding that (1) claims to not rely on formal logic, and (2) that will find application in "areas that require discovery of Semantics from lower level representations such as text, DNA sequences, and other streams of spatiotemporal events."

HTM, indeed.

Syntience is described as "a Silicon Valley Research corporation...developing a novel document understanding algorithm named Artificial Intuition which starts from the idea that language comprehension in humans is based more on intuition than logic." Syntience is also on Facebook page http://www.facebook.c...­, has a video page http://videos.syntien...­, and is associated with the Bay Area Future Salon http://www.futuresalo...­ (which doesn't appear to be aligned with ours).


Chloe
user 9788588
New York, NY
Post #: 6
Just wanted to add that on top of what Stewart said, Monica Anderson mentions somewhere that AI will be achieved not just by her artificial intuition system but ultimately symbolic logic system incorporated with it once her system is perfected. But in a different way from MIT stuff we'll be discussing at the next meeting. Instead of different approaches synthesized in one program, I think what she has in mind is more like 'conbecting' two different approaches as separate distinct entities-

Chloe
Stuart Mason D.
sdambrot
New York, NY
Post #: 30
Just wanted to add that on top of what Stewart said, Monica Anderson mentions somewhere that AI will be achieved not just by her artificial intuition system but ultimately symbolic logic system incorporated with it once her system is perfected. But in a different way from MIT stuff we'll be discussing at the next meeting. Instead of different approaches synthesized in one program, I think what she has in mind is more like 'conbecting' two different approaches as separate distinct entities-

Chloe


Chloe - please provide a link to where Monica discusses the ultimate synthesis of AM and logic, because I can't find evidence of that on the Syntience or Artificial Intuition websites.

She introduces us to AN on http://artificial-int...­, where while she suggests that AN is incomplete by writing "Artificial Intuition is a new, different, and promising (but so far unproven) way to approach a large subset of the problems we believe require 'Artificial Intelligence'," she adds that she "will attempt to show that it is implausible that the brain should be based on Logic. I believe Intelligence emerges from millions of nested micro-intuitions, and that true Artificial Intelligence requires Artificial Intuition."

Although she discusses the relative strengths of both approaches on http://artificial-int...­, she clearly states at the top of the page that "We can trade the Seven Values of Logic Based Science for about a dozen Benefits of Intuition Based Methods. The brain needs none of the former and provides all of the latter."

Moreover, on http://artificial-int...­, she notes that "In 1998, I had been working on industrial AI — mostly expert systems and Natural Language processing — for over a decade. And like many others, for over a decade I had been waiting for Doug Lenat's much hyped CYC project to be released. As it happened, I was given access to CYC for several months, and was disappointed when it did not live up to my expectations. I lost faith in Symbolic Strong AI, and almost left the AI field entirely."

Finally, on http://artificial-int...­, she writes that "Occasionally Logic-based systems may be able to overcome (to some extent) one or the other of these problem types but Bizarre Systems contain too many of these to be managed using Logic based approaches; they interact in bad ways....All of these [AI] problem types resist Logic based approaches. Artificial Intuition provides an alternative strategy to deal with these since it is immune to all of them by virtue of not using Logic-based models."

In short, your statements do not appear to be supported by hers. However, I would be delighted to be proven wrong -so again, please provide a link to where she explicitly states that both AN and Logic are required for AI.

PS. Not to be picky, but it's Stuart, not Stewart.
Rob
user 6264915
Group Organizer
New York, NY
Post #: 10
The whole thing screams FRAUD to me, and I'm looking for evidence that shows differently.
Chloe
user 9788588
New York, NY
Post #: 7
Sorry Stuart! it's annoying when people don't spell your name right...

I don't remember exactly where, it might even be in that conference video we watched (I watched the whole thing at home after the meeting)- or on one of the 3 related websites between Anderson's personal websites and Syntience web site. I'll sift through them to see if I can locate it but it might take some time... (I have a feeling it's in one of her videos-)

But she mentions it very briefly in passing. She tends to pit symbolic logic systems against her intuitive system, so I think some people ask her why she thinks her system will work but not the other, and she makes a brief clarification to the point that she thinks in order for AGI to happen, symbolic logic systems 'alone' isn't going to do it because it only addresses small part of how she divides human like intelligence- the reasoning part. According to her, the mundane part of intelligence is what makes up most of what human like intelligence is, and she said that something like her system will take care of that large part of intelligence (mundane part), not symbolic logic systems.

Her point was, symbolic logic system is not going to achieve AGI alone, but that's not saying it didn't achieve part of what AGI would be already- just that it plays a very small part, a part that would be added (I think the specific phrase she used was 'built on top of') to her artificial intuition system, to complete the picture of AGI once her system is adequately functioning enough to cover the large mundane part of intelligence.

She had no comments to make about the mytical part of the intelligence which is also very small part of how she divided human like intelligence. I'm sorry I can't remember specific place I can refer this to- I will try to refrain from paraphrasing other people's statements if I can't provide the exact reference point-

Chloe
Stuart Mason D.
sdambrot
New York, NY
Post #: 31
Chloe - If you can find the source by Saturday's meetup it would be very helpful.
Chloe
user 9788588
New York, NY
Post #: 8
I found it- it is in the conference video as well as one of her website articles (contents of the two mirror each other and I provided links for both.)

http://monicasmind.co...­
After separating intelligence into reasoning (logic based) and understanding (intuition based), she says that 20th century AI research focused on reasoning which constitutes "paint thin layer" of intelligence and she's focusing on the other part of intelligence (part that makes up most of what intelligence is) with her artificial intuition. Then she says:
"In the 20th century, AI research was overmuch concerned with this thin layer of Reasoning. In the 21st century we must focus our AI research and resources on Understanding. Our computers need Artificial Intuition in order to recognize sensory input data and understand concepts at low levels. Only after they understand something will they have something to reason about. The Understanding part could well be straightforward and easy to implement in computers compared to our attempts so far to automate Reasoning; we just need to implement these two in the correct order."

http://vimeo.com/9508...­
11:15 min. into the video:
She says that we should not restrict AGI implementatations to rational/logical model based methods because we will be stuck in that paint thin layer part of intelligence. Then goes on to say
22:35 min. into the video:
(...goes on to say after describing her artificial intuition substrate) "on top of this (meaning on top of her artificial intuition substrate) we can now implement out pant thin layer of reasoning."



I need to correct myself here- previously I said Anderson divided human like intelligence into the rational, the mundane, and the mystical; I was wrong- these are how she divides human experience not intelligence (of which the mundane takes up the largest part and utilized intuitive understanding).

I hope this helps!

Chloe


Stuart Mason D.
sdambrot
New York, NY
Post #: 32
Well done!!! It throws her views into sharper relief.

Thank you - and we missed you at the meeting.
Chloe
user 9788588
New York, NY
Post #: 9
:). I had to change my RSVP to take care of something... See you at the next meeting!

Chloe
Powered by mvnForum

People in this
Meetup are also in:

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy