Re: perfect knowledge in AI

Does Perfection imply completeness?
Discuss


On Mon, May 9, 2022 at 2:47 PM ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program <
metadataportals@yahoo.com> wrote:

> If perfect implies complete, we can rule it out because of the proofs by
> Godel and Turing on incompleteness and undecidability.
> The concept of perfect only exists in mathematics with the definition of
> perfect numbers.
> Unbiased reasoning that leads to results for which truth values can be
> determined in terms of validity, reproducibility, equivalence and causal
> relationships are the best way to go for knowledge representation.
> Knowledge and for that matter consciousness as well are as yet not
> unequivocally defined, and as such perfection in this context is not
> attainable.
>
>
> 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 Sunday, May 8, 2022, 04:15:01 AM AST, Paola Di Maio <
> paola.dimaio@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Dave R's latest post  to the cog ai list reminds us of the ultimate.
> Perfect knowledge is a thing. Is there any such thing, really? How can it
> be pursued?
> Can we distinguish
> perfect knowledge rom its perfect representation
>
>
> Much there is to say about it. In other schools, we start by clearing the
> obscurations in our own mind  . That is a lifetime pursuit.
> While we get there, I take the opportunity to reflect on the perfect
> knowledge literature in AI, a worthy topic to remember
>
> I someone would like to access the article below, email me, I can share my
> copy
>
>
> ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE 111
> Perfect Knowledge Revisited*
> S.T. Dekker, H.J. van den Herik and
> l.S. Herschberg
> Delft University of Technology, Department of Mathematics
> and Informatics, 2628 BL Delft, Netherlands
> ABSTRACT
> Database research slowly arrives at the stage where perfect knowledge
> allows us to grasp simple
> endgames which, in most instances, show pathologies never thought o f by
> Grandmasters' intuition.
> For some endgames, the maximin exceeds FIDE's 50-move rule, thus
> precipitating a discussion
> about altering the rule. However, even though it is now possible to
> determine exactly the path lengths
> o f many 5-men endgames (or o f fewer men), it is felt there is an
> essential flaw if each endgame
> should have its own limit to the number o f moves. This paper focuses on
> the consequences o f a
> k-move rule which, whatever the value o f k, may change a naive optimal
> strategy into a k-optimal
> strategy which may well be radically different.
> 1. Introduction
> Full knowledge of some endgames involving 3 or 4 men has first been made
> available by Str6hlein [12]. However, his work did not immediately receive
> the
> recognition it deserved. This resulted in several reinventions of the
> retrograde
> enumeration technique around 1975, e.g., by Clarke, Thompson and by
> Komissarchik and Futer. Berliner [2] reported in the same vein at an early
> date
> as did Newborn [11]. It is only recent advances in computers that allowed
> comfortably tackling endgames of 5 men, though undaunted previous efforts
> are on record (Komissarchik and Futer [8], Arlazarov and Futer [1]). Over
> the
> past four years, Ken Thompson has been a conspicuous labourer in this
> particular field (Herschberg and van den Herik [6], Thompson [13]).
> As of this writing, three 3-men endgames, five 4-men endgames, twelve
> 5-men endgames without pawns and three 5-men endgames with a pawn [4] can
> be said to have been solved under the convention that White is the stronger
> *The research reported in this contribution has been made possible by the
> Netherlands
> Organization for Advancement of Pure Research (ZWO), dossier number 39 SC
> 68-129, notably
> by their donation of computer time on the Amsterdam Cyber 205. The opinions expressed
> are
> those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the
> Organization.
> Artificial Intelligence 43 (1990) 111-123
> 0004-3702/90/$3.50 © 1990, Elsevier Science Publishers B.V.
> (North-Holland)
> 112 S.T. D E K K E R ET AL.
> side and Black provides optimal resistance, which is to say that Black
> will delay
> as long as possible either mate or an inevitable conversion into another
> lost
> endgame. Conversion is taken in its larger sense. It may consist in
> converting
> to an endgame of different pieces, e.g., by promoting a pawn; equally, it
> may
> involve the loss of a piece and, finally and most subtly, it may involve a
> pawn
> move which turns an endgame into an essentially different endgame: a case
> in
> point is the pawn move in the KQP(a6)KQ endgame converting it into
> KQP(a7)KQ (for notation, see Appendix A).
> The database, when constructed, defines an entry for every legal configura-
> tion; from this, for each position, a sequence of moves known to be optimal
> can be derived. The retrograde analysis is performed by a full-width
> backward-
> chaining procedure, starting from definitive positions (mate or
> conversion), as
> described in detail by van den Herik and Herschberg [18]; this yields a
> database. The maximum length of all optimal paths is called the maximin
> (von
> Neumann and Morgenstern [16]), i.e., the number of moves necessary and
> sufficient to reach a definitive position from an arbitrary given position
> with
> White to move (WTM) and assuming optimal defence
> CONCLUSION
> It has now become clear that the notion of optimal play has been rather
> naively
> defined so far. At the very least, the notion of optimality requires a
> specific
> value of k for k-optimality and hence a careful bookkeeping of all
> relevant
> anteriorities. These additional requirements form but one instance of
> aiming to
> achieve optimal play under constraints; of such constraints a k-move rule
> is
> merely one instance. In essence, it is not our opinion that a k-move rule
> spoils
> the game of chess; on the contrary, like any other constraint, it may be
> said to
> enrich it, even though at present it appears to puzzle database
> constructors,
> chess theoreticians and Grandmasters alike.
>
>
>