Re: New slides on Cognitive AI

> On 13 Jan 2020, at 05:28, Paola Di Maio <paoladimaio10@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Paul and Dave 
> 
> (Paul: thanks for joining!  good to see new people jump in the discussion.
> and thanks for offering some analysis of the question)
> I  distinguish between
>  animal intelligence (vs say, plant intelligence)
> and animal with brain vs animal without brain
> 
> I say this because biological intelligence sounds like animals/humans are non biological
> which in my view, would be wrong

Curious that you percent it that way.

> 
> In sum Dave, all the AI I have ever studied is cognitive AI, from the day the term was coined up to our days. Do you know of any book, conference or course of study that looks at intelligence
> without brain ONLY?
> Even just to talk about intelligence without brain, we as human must use
> cognitive intelligence (concepts, language etc)
> This is to say that non cognitive AI may exist in nature (in plants and animals without brain)
> but all the AI has field of study in CS, from the beginning is Cognitive
> but please correct me otherwise

Much of the work on AI has very little connection to the cognitive sciences and has been conducted as a separate discipline with very little contact between the respective communities, e.g. work on search, formal logic, natural language, robotics, and even artificial neural networks, e.g. contrast the work on deep learning with that on computational models for neuroscience by Chris Eliasmith.



> PDM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 2:02 PM Paul Alagna <pjalagna@gmail.com <mailto:pjalagna@gmail.com>> wrote:
> All;
> Paola asked
> <<aren't all AI systems cognitive?>> This got me thinking about what a cognitive system is and what is its relationship to AI. So I grabbed websters for a definition: 
> ====
> the mental action or process of acquiring knowledge and understanding through thought, experience, and the senses.
> ====
> and began to break down each fragment into data science/AI terms:
> 
> the mental action or process (lets go with processes)
> of acquiring (==the input of and storing of) 
> knowledge(==information?) and 
> understanding(==being able to use? IE having actions of usage)OR(==having a correct usage)
> through 
> -- thought(==internal learning), 
> -- experience(==external learning), and 
> -- the senses(==environmental input).
> ====
> so, do you agree with my equivalencies? knowledge(==information?), etc.
> 
> Are all AI systems cognitive? this was Paola's question. 
> No not ALL. some have no provision for internal learning, or for environmental inputs. Or in the case of partially taught systems a complete "understanding".
> 
> thoughts?
> 
> Thanks
> PAUL ALAGNA
> PJAlagna@Gmail.com <mailto:PJAlagna@gmail.com>
> 
> 
>> On Jan 10, 2020, at 10:26 PM, Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com <mailto:paola.dimaio@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> Thanks!
>> 
>> for me all AI is cognitive, is there a way to distinguish it from non cognitive?
>> P
>> 
>> On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 12:05 AM Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org <mailto:dsr@w3.org>> wrote:
>> I’ve published a new slide deck that explains how cognitive agents can be implemented as a suite of components for perception, feelings, thought, action and cognitive databases.
>> 
>> See: https://www.w3.org/Data/demos/chunks/chunks-20200110.pdf <https://www.w3.org/Data/demos/chunks/chunks-20200110.pdf>
>> 
>> This in support of the new Cognitive AI Community Group, where we are still at an early stage, and plan to soon have a GitHub repository for documentation and issue tracking, etc.
>> 
>> Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org <mailto:dsr@w3.org>> http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett <http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett>
>> W3C Data Activity Lead & W3C champion for the Web of things 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 

Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett
W3C Data Activity Lead & W3C champion for the Web of things