Non-Axiomatic Reasoning System: Exploring the Essence of Intelligence

Dissertation, Indiana University (1995)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Every artificial-intelligence research project needs a working definition of "intelligence", on which the deepest goals and assumptions of the research are based. In the project described in the following chapters, "intelligence" is defined as the capacity to adapt under insufficient knowledge and resources. Concretely, an intelligent system should be finite and open, and should work in real time. ;If these criteria are used in the design of a reasoning system, the result is NARS, a non-axiomatic reasoning system. ;NARS uses a term-oriented formal language, characterized by the use of subject-predicate sentences. The language has an experience-grounded semantics, according to which the truth value of a judgment is determined by previous experience, and the meaning of a term is determined by its relations with other terms. Several different types of uncertainty, such as randomness, fuzziness, and ignorance, can be represented in the language in a single way. ;The inference rules of NARS are based on three inheritance relations between terms. With different combinations of premises, revision, deduction, induction, abduction, exemplification, comparison, and analogy can all be carried out in a uniform format, the major difference between these types of inference being that different functions are used to calculate the truth value of the conclusion from the truth values of the premises. ;Since it has insufficient space-time resources, the system needs to distribute them among its tasks very carefully, and to dynamically adjust the distribution as the situation changes. This leads to a "controlled concurrency" control mechanism, and a "bag-based" memory organization. ;A recent implementation of the NARS model, with examples, is discussed. The system has many interesting properties that are shared by human cognition, but are absent from conventional computational models of reasoning. ;This research sheds light on several notions in artificial intelligence and cognitive science, including symbol-grounding, induction, categorization, logic, and computation. These are discussed to show the implications of the new theory of intelligence. ;Finally, the major results of the research are summarized, a preliminary evaluation of the working definition of intelligence is given, and the limitations and future extensions of the research are discussed

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,532

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analogy making in legal reasoning with neural networks and fuzzy logic.Jürgen Hollatz - 1999 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 7 (2-3):289-301.
Argumentation Without Arguments.Henry Prakken - 2011 - Argumentation 25 (2):171-184.
A theory of legal reasoning and a logic to match.Jaap Hage - 1996 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (3-4):199-273.
Building brains for bodies.Rodney A. Brooks & Lynn Andrea Stein - 1994 - Autonomous Robotics 1 (1):7-25.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-02-04

Downloads
0

6 months
0

Historical graph of downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

AI and social theory.Jakob Mökander & Ralph Schroeder - 2022 - AI and Society 37 (4):1337-1351.
Case-by-case problem solving.Pei Wang - 2009 - In B. Goertzel, P. Hitzler & M. Hutter (eds.), Proceedings of the Second Conference on Artificial General Intelligence. Atlantis Press. pp. 180--185.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references