Home
Gustavo Lacerda

> recent entries
> calendar
> friends
> My Website
> profile

Friday, July 15th, 2005
8:24p - Qualitative Reasoning
Qualitative Reasoning seems to be about reasoning with abstract or vague knowledge (i.e. uncertainty). I think it's only needed because there would too many models (in the logic sense) for a probable worlds approach to be feasible (the same reason why non-monotonic reasoning might be necessary... I used to not like non-monotonic reasoning: you could say I was a Cheesemanian).


http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/qr/book/ from here:
This book presents, within a conceptually unified theoretical framework, a body of methods that have been developed over the past fifteen years for building and simulating qualitative models of physical systems (bathtubs, tea kettles, automobiles, the physiology of the body, chemical processing plants, control systems, electrical circuits, and the like) where knowledge of that system is incomplete. The primary tool for this work is the author's QSIM algorithm which is discussed in detail.


I like the idea of qualitative differential equations. Many of my intuitions and arguments about economics are based on such things.

For example, the principle of decreasing returns is one where the utility function 'U(w)' of the work 'w' satisfies:
U is always positive and
U' is always positive
but U'' is always negative

I find it really cool to be able to draw conclusions from such abstract principles. Maybe this is related to my liking of proofs that use fundamental constraints (e.g. symmetry, information theory) or abstract philosophical assumptions (e.g. the world is a computer).

(comment on this)

9:16p - on the rationalist foundations of AI
Ok, I can be too much of a rationalist to live my life properly, but does this make me a bad scientist/philosopher?

Winograd, for one, has been critical of rationalistic (reductionistic?) tendencies in AI.

from William J Clancy - Practice Cannot be Reduced to Theory: Knowledge, Representations, and Change in the Workplace:


Fig. 1. Rationalist view of knowledge and representations

These seem like the philosophical foundation for my views about AI & intelligence in general.
Since they've nailed down my view, I guess I really should read Winograd to see if they can change my mind.


Btw, let me hypothesize that "neat" vs "scruffy" orientation correlates with political opinion.


Right-Wing AI:
* rationalist
* truth-conservative

Left-Wing AI:
* evolving
* non-monotonic
* connectionist
* "situated cognition"/"embodied cognition"

(2 comments |comment on this)

9:36p - isn't "truth-maintenance system" (TMS) a presumptuous misnomer
Fellow AIers, isn't "truth-maintenance system" (TMS) a presumptuous misnomer? While "belief-revision system" is too vague, I would be much happier with "consistency-maintenance system" or "contradiction-resolution system".

(2 comments |comment on this)

10:16p - theoretical biology
This seems like a very cool place:

THE KONRAD LORENZ INSTITUTE FOR EVOLUTION AND COGNITION RESEARCH:
"The KLI is an advanced research center in theoretical biology"

especially their Theory Lab
from http://www.kli.ac.at/theorylab.html:
The primary aim of the KLI Theory Lab is to foster interdisciplinarity by highlighting thematic interconnections between areas that seem intellectually promising, but often remain invisible because of the disciplinary organization of the scientific enterprise.

(1 comment |comment on this)

<< previous day [calendar] next day >>
> top of page
LiveJournal.com