- From: Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2020 14:24:46 +0800
- To: W3C AIKR CG <public-aikr@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAMXe=SpncRKZKZ+mXYV5wMbgnypf5z5iQdbb=Z2dC1A_ec=Mow@mail.gmail.com>
Follow up thoughts if KR and this KRAIcg can contribute to COGAI (which is work to be done in AI ) some thoughts below, and a useful read Representational Limits in Cognitive Architectures http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1855/EUCognition_2016_Part4.pdf ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com> Date: Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 12:40 PM Subject: and two more thoughts To: public-cogai <public-cogai@w3.org> - would be nice to see a more explicit explanation of how the chunks (are you proposing that chunks become a specification?) fit in the ACT-R architecture, and how ACT-R fits/reflects the cortex/cognitive function - since ACT- R is a very abstract model, would be nice to see an analysis of how the demos implement and validate the model (sorry if this is obvious) can ACT-R valid in real/useful in the real world and can the demos help to identify also its limitations? Related article Representational Limits in Cognitive Architectures http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1855/EUCognition_2016_Part4.pdf
Received on Tuesday, 22 September 2020 06:25:43 UTC