gillies@m.cs.uiuc.edu (10/17/90)
> We could add to the list a host of medical instruments such as > cat-scans (sp?) and Ultra-sounds. (Both look at internal organs > without surgery) Then there are tools such as character readers, text > and graphic scanners, and the nifty little barcode readers at the > supermarket. It is wrong to classify individual problems as "AI". I deeply resent this when AI researchers commit this error, as the person above has. The work on Catscans and NMR/MRI is good physics and a good application of known methods of exact scientific computation, period. Either AI is a scientific method of making computers solve problems or it is nothing at all. > Our definition of AI is basically "whatever we haven't figured out how > to do yet." As soon as AI research refines the methods, the problem > falls out of the AI category. Once again, the person who wrote the above quote has made an error in judgement. If a refinement of an AI method continues to solve a problem (and no other methods produce superior results), then it is a triumph of AI. I believe symbolic intergration programs such as Mathematica are good examples of refined AI computation. Chess programs such as the leading chess program from CMU (Deep Thought?) are bad examples since they demonstrate that brute force triumphs over sophisticated heuristics.
vanadis@cs.dal.ca (Jose Castejon-Amenedo) (10/18/90)
In a previous posting, gillies@m.cs.uiuc.edu says > I believe symbolic intergration programs such as Mathematica are good > examples of refined AI computation. Chess programs such as the > leading chess program from CMU (Deep Thought?) are bad examples since > they demonstrate that brute force triumphs over sophisticated > heuristics. I am not sure if these two problems are so different. After the tour-de-force of Risch, integration is, in many instances, a question of brute force, not so different from differentiation. Now, I believe that the processes of analytic differentiation and the alpha-beta family of procedures used in chess programs are both examples of brute force techniques. But then again, perhaps AI and natural intelligence are just hierarchies of brute force techniques, Penrose permitting. Anyway, I see no difference between Deep Thought and Mathematica, in this respect. Obviously, this is only my point of view, with all its insignificance. Jose Castejon-Amenedo vanadis@cs.dal.ca
klb@unislc.uucp (Keith L. Breinholt) (10/24/90)
From article <3200031@m.cs.uiuc.edu>, by gillies@m.cs.uiuc.edu: > >> We could add to the list a host of medical instruments such as >> cat-scans (sp?) and Ultra-sounds. (Both look at internal organs >> without surgery) Then there are tools such as character readers, text >> and graphic scanners, and the nifty little barcode readers at the >> supermarket. > > It is wrong to classify individual problems as "AI". I deeply resent > this when AI researchers commit this error, as the person above has. > The work on Catscans and NMR/MRI is good physics and a good application > of known methods of exact scientific computation, period. > > Either AI is a scientific method of making computers solve problems or > it is nothing at all. To correct what you thought I said. I was not classifying anything as "AI". What I was doing was giving a list of technologies that use fruits from AI research as a common usage/practice. Everything mentioned above has benefited in one way or another. There is not an imaging device in existance (except photography equipment) that is not a benifactor of AI vision research, Catscans and NMR/MRI included. >> Our definition of AI is basically "whatever we haven't figured out how >> to do yet." As soon as AI research refines the methods, the problem >> falls out of the AI category. > > Once again, the person who wrote the above quote has made an error in > judgement. If a refinement of an AI method continues to solve a > problem (and no other methods produce superior results), then it is a > triumph of AI. I think you just made my point. Keith -- ___________________________________________________________________________ Keith L. Breinholt hellgate.utah.edu!uplherc!unislc!klb or Unisys, Unix Systems Group kbreinho@peruvian.utah.edu