Joined: Oct. 2012
|Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Nov. 07 2012,04:14)|
|There are a number of strategies involved in solving the TSP, of which intelligence certainly is one. |
For example, animals who cache food have been shown to compute a near-optimal TSP route between each cache.
When people are asked to solve a TSP by instinct they realise †certain attributes of a path will not be optimal. For example, paths that cross or paths criss crossing the "interior" of the network will (typically) be non-optimal and without any experience of this people perform much better then random search by default.
|The relation between perceptual organization and the process of solving visually presented TSPs is briefly discussed, as is the potential of optimization for providing a conceptual framework for the study of intelligence.|
So, Gary, your comparison fails. The difference between a pocket calculator and an intelligence solving the TSP is measured in lifetimes of universes. And plenty of other people think there is a relationship between solving the TSP and intelligence. Except you, of course. No doubt every potential "test" that comes your way will be dismissed in a similar way.
If your intelligence is nothing more then a pocket calculator it'll fail to solve any complex TSP by brute force. If it's more then that I expect a better result then a pocket calculator.
If it's intelligent, as you claim, that intelligence can be measured by it's ability to solve the TSP without having to brute force it.
|You are now demanding an unfair comparison so that you can say that your pocket calculator is a superior model of intelligence, while also suggesting that it better explains how intelligent causation works.|
Which is funny because it was also you who said:
|It's more technologically demanding, but as I earlier mentioned the model puts EA's and GA's to shame, as though they are baby-toys.|
So, the situation seems to be that the "baby toys" you disparage can do something (solve the TSP and find near or optimum solutions) that your "intelligence" cannot. So in what way is your intelligence putting GA's to shame if it can't actually do what those GA's do?
And in case you are not aware (you are not) the TSP "problem" is just a reflection of a deeper reality:
|Besides being a "polytope" of a difficult combinatorial optimization problem from a complexity theory point of view, there are important cases of practical problems that can be formulated as TSP problems and many other problems are generalizations of this problem. †Besides the drilling of printed circuits boards described above, problems having the TSP structure occur in the analysis of the structure of crystals, (Bland and Shallcross, 1987), the overhauling of gas turbine engines (Pante, Lowe and Chandrasekaran, 1987), in material handling in a warehouse (Ratliff and Rosenthal, 1981), in cutting stock problems, (Garfinkel, 1977), the clustering of data arrays, (Lenstra and Rinooy Kan, 1975), the sequencing of jobs on a single machine (Gilmore and Gomory, 1964) and the assignment of routes for planes of a specified fleet (Boland, Jones, and Nemhauser, 1994). Related variations on the traveling salesman problem include the resource constrained traveling salesman problem which has applications in scheduling with an aggregate deadline (Pekny and Miller, 1990). This paper also shows how the prize collecting traveling salesman problem (Balas, 1989) and the orienteering problem (Golden, Levy and Vohra, 1987) are special cases of the resource constrained TSP. Most importantly, the traveling salesman problem often comes up as a subproblem in more complex combinatorial problems, the best known and important one of which is the vehicle routing problem, that is, the problem of determining for a fleet of vehicles which customers should be served by each vehicle and in what order each vehicle should visit the customers assigned to it.|
If your "intelligence" can indeed make GA's that solve the TSP look like baby toys then you will be RICH overnight. Simply optimising the delivery route for a courier company can save many $$.
So, Gary, your move.
Not a bad response, but you are also comparing algorithms that are not for modeling intelligence to one that is the starting point for modeling any intelligence, as well as intelligent causation events, and can develop into new species just as in reality. †In fact, that's what you end up with where you make a molecule by molecule model a cell, or neuron by neuron model of a human brain.
I have no doubt that it would easily solve the Traveling Salesman Problem. †But I do not have the time and resources for the hundreds of things I can only wish I could afford and be able to do. †And it's certainly not my fault that scientific resources are only allowed to be used to stop me from succeeding because of my work so easily meeting the requirements of the premise of the Theory of Intelligent Design...
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.