Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA (11/18/83)
From: Ken Laws <Laws@SRI-AI.ARPA>
I had some difficultly refuting a friend's argument that intelligence
is "problem solving ability", and that deciding what problems to solve
is just one facet or level of intelligence. I realize that this is
a vague definition, but does anyone have a refutation?
I think we can take for granted that summing the same numbers over and
over is not more intelligent than summing them once. Discovering a
new method of summing them (e.g., finding a pattern and a formula for
taking advantage of it) is intelligent, however. To some extent,
then, the novelty of the problem and the methods used in its solution
must be taken into account.
Suppose that we define intelligence in terms of the problem-solving
techniques available in an entity's repertoire. A machine's intelligence
could be described much as a pocket calculator's capabilities are:
this one has modus ponens, that one can manipulate limits of series.
The partial ordering of such capabilities must necessarily be goal-
dependent and so should be left to the purchaser.
I agree with the AIList reader who defined an intelligent entity as
one that builds and refines knowledge structures representing its world.
Ability to manipulate and interconvert particular knowledge structures
fits well into the capability rating system above. Learning, or ability
to remember new techniques so that they need not be rederived, is
downplayed in this view of intelligence, although I am sure that it is
more than just an efficiency hack. Problem solving speed seems to be
orthogonal to the capability dimension, as does motivation to solve
problems.
-- Ken Laws