Thanks for the link. But there are actually more issues in play
According to Russell and Norvig (1995) artificial intelligence may be realized in four different ways: systems that think like humans, systems that think rationally, systems that act like humans, and systems that act rationally. The existing cognitive architectures have explored all four possibilities.
But if we stick for a moment to classical Greco Roman and Buddhist thinking, which share an ample body of though on logic, perception, (views) of reality, the role of language in rational thinking, philosophy, and importantly feelings, emotions, compassion and empathy we MUST include all forms of communications, emotions, the use of language and philosophical thinking if AGI is to resemble human-like AI.
My gut feeling tells me that neuro scientists are on the right track, but they should instead focus on path networks in the brain which model spatio-temporal interactions between different parts of the brain's networks of neurons, which is in essence how neurons interact, and quantum, electromagnetic wave and chemical processes take place, at the heart of all brain activity, not just cognitive processes.
Somehow the term cognitive architecture doesn't fit the bill entirely
Milton Ponson
GSM: +297 747 8280
PO Box 1154, Oranjestad
Aruba, Dutch Caribbean
Project Paradigm: Bringing the ICT tools for sustainable development to all stakeholders worldwide through collaborative research on applied mathematics, advanced modeling, software and standards development
On Wednesday, February 10, 2021, 12:50:55 AM AST, Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com> wrote:
Found some of the answers I was looking for in this paper, open access!It finally gives the much needed overview to help us bridge with KRThere are many implications for the future of KR
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10462-018-9646-y#Sec2
