RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (608) < ... 597 598 599 600 601 [602] 603 604 605 606 607 ... >   
  Topic: A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin, As big as the poop that does not look< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4907
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 24 2017,19:51   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Sep. 24 2017,14:42)
 
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Sep. 24 2017,13:02)
The prime examples in Gary's stuff being the complete lack of anything that looks like an implementation of a Trehub neural model (look, Ma, no comb filters!) and the complete absence of Heiserman "gamma" processes.

The simplified block diagram is representative of both "Beta" and "Gamma", as well as ONE ILLUSTRATION from Arnold Trehub showing the same basic interconnections. There should be no issue with my crediting who I learned it from, and evidence that the system will also work for generating human level intelligence.

I am not obligated to prove that every prediction that the authors ever made are all true. I already have way more work than I can finish in one lifetime and should now be working on the ID Lab.

The block diagram isn't Gary's code. Gary's code defines what Gary is using. Gary specifically disavowed any need to actually use Heiserman "gamma" processes earlier, and also specifically disavowed actually having to implement *any* neural network, much less Trehub's specific model.

Citing people is a fine thing. However, merely dropping a bibliographic entry into the citation list and name-dropping something in the text does not automatically transfer *any* credence or authority from the cited person.

 
Quote

I am not obligated to prove that every prediction that the authors ever made are all true.


Nobody has asked Gary to do any such thing. All I've requested is that Gary demonstrate that the specific ideas he relies upon are of current utility to others beside himself. Gary is having a very difficult time doing something that should be utterly simple, would that he were relying on things that could be described as something other than "old junk".

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
Henry J



Posts: 4815
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 24 2017,21:09   

Well, one should be quite careful about using "gamma" processes, considering what those did to Dr. Banner and B. Grim.

  
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5238
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 24 2017,21:52   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Sep. 24 2017,19:51)
The block diagram isn't Gary's code. Gary's code defines what Gary is using. Gary specifically disavowed any need to actually use Heiserman "gamma" processes earlier, and also specifically disavowed actually having to implement *any* neural network, much less Trehub's specific model.

I earlier explained that a "neural network" is just another RAM that can be optionally used, which David Heiserman simply added by using eight 2141 binary static RAM chips for "Main Memory". I do the same thing, by using code to dimension a digital RAM array on my PC.

It is hypocritical for you to suggest that I need to use an Artificial Neural Network, by changing the subject to Arnold Trehub who explained Synaptic Matrices not ANN's, anyway. I modeled ANN's after modeling synaptic matrices per Arnold Trehub. Both are very different but still reduced down to what digital RAM can also do and without forgetting or needing reinforcement plus sleep to make a memory permanent. Only difference is the critter has a memory that rivals rare people who can remember everything almost that well and never gets tired out then have to wait for it to wake up again.

I'm remaining true to what David modeled, which used digital RAM and a digital random generator to take a "guess" when "confidence level" goes to zero. My adapting to the labeling that Arnold Trehub used to label the same overall underlying circuit does not obligate me to use synaptic matrix or other method of your choice in place of what a PC already has to store memories. It works just fine for testing things like the spatial reasoning network, which seems to not even matter to you. For some reason your petty quibbling comes before important science progress. Why is that?

--------------
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.

   
N.Wells



Posts: 1772
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 25 2017,14:19   

Quote (Henry J @ Sep. 24 2017,21:09)
Well, one should be quite careful about using "gamma" processes, considering what those did to Dr. Banner and B. Grim.

Again, it would be nice to have a "like" button.

  
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5238
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 25 2017,19:04   

Quote (N.Wells @ Sep. 25 2017,14:19)
     
Quote (Henry J @ Sep. 24 2017,21:09)
Well, one should be quite careful about using "gamma" processes, considering what those did to Dr. Banner and B. Grim.

Again, it would be nice to have a "like" button.


See "Classes Of Robotic Self-Learning" that's right above David's picture. I checked the Source, and surprise!

cyberneticzoo.com/cyberneticanimals/1979-rodney-self-programming-robot-david-l-heiserman-american/

It's word for word from his book. My wife helped proofread it over and over again to make sure it's all there.  

Another way to explain it is: Gamma adds a subroutine to alter the properties of the RAM in a way that if what happened is similar to something else that did not yet happen then the same information is stored at more than one memory location. It's an interesting way to add some of the benefits of having a frontal cortex, but the model I'm working on needs to add that (and more) by using a brainwave powered spatial reasoning network and such.

Having a "Gamma" subroutine altering the contents of memory for systems that must have no changes made at all would just cause conflicts that crash the system.

--------------
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.

   
coldfirephoenix



Posts: 46
Joined: Sep. 2017

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 25 2017,19:55   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Sep. 25 2017,19:04)
Quote (N.Wells @ Sep. 25 2017,14:19)
       
Quote (Henry J @ Sep. 24 2017,21:09)
Well, one should be quite careful about using "gamma" processes, considering what those did to Dr. Banner and B. Grim.

Again, it would be nice to have a "like" button.


See "Classes Of Robotic Self-Learning" that's right above David's picture. I checked the Source, and surprise!

cyberneticzoo.com/cyberneticanimals/1979-rodney-self-programming-robot-david-l-heiserman-american/

It's word for word from his book. My wife helped proofread it over and over again to make sure it's all there.  

Another way to explain it is: Gamma adds a subroutine to alter the properties of the RAM in a way that if what happened is similar to something else that did not yet happen then the same information is stored at more than one memory location. It's an interesting way to add some of the benefits of having a frontal cortex, but the model I'm working on needs to add that (and more) by using a brainwave powered spatial reasoning network and such.

Having a "Gamma" subroutine altering the contents of memory for systems that must have no changes made at all would just cause conflicts that crash the system.

The joke ===============>
.
.
.
Gary's head -> (o_O)




Apart from that, that's equal parts wordsalad, unsupported assertions, failure to grasp how science works and what people criticized in the first place.

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4907
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 25 2017,21:28   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Sep. 24 2017,21:52)
     
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Sep. 24 2017,19:51)
The block diagram isn't Gary's code. Gary's code defines what Gary is using. Gary specifically disavowed any need to actually use Heiserman "gamma" processes earlier, and also specifically disavowed actually having to implement *any* neural network, much less Trehub's specific model.

I earlier explained that a "neural network" is just another RAM that can be optionally used,


Gary earlier communicated clearly that he has no clue what a neural network is, and confirms that again quite effectively just a few sentences on.

     
Quote

which David Heiserman simply added by using eight 2141 binary static RAM chips for "Main Memory". I do the same thing, by using code to dimension a digital RAM array on my PC.


Yeah, Heiserman used RAM. Not exactly his own notion, and Heiserman never asserted that RAM equated to a neural network.

     
Quote

It is hypocritical for you to suggest that I need to use an Artificial Neural Network, by changing the subject to Arnold Trehub who explained Synaptic Matrices not ANN's, anyway.


Gary doesn't understand what "hypocrisy" means, though he engages in it extensively.

Trehub, for what it is worth, was quite OK with putting his work in the context of neural models and "connectionism", the then-current phrasing for what is now called artificial neural networks. Trehub references Rumelhart, McClelland, Hopfield, and a variety of others in setting forth how his models corresponded to or differed from other connectionist models. The notion that because Trehub calls one of his models a "synaptic matrix" somehow takes it out of the realm of artificial neural systems would be just like saying that "perceptrons", "outstars", "BAMs", and "neocognitrons" were outside the field, too, because a name had been attached to a specific model. Just in case Gary is having a hard time with that, the notion is *ridiculous*, as in, "deserving of ridicule".

     
Quote

I modeled ANN's after modeling synaptic matrices per Arnold Trehub.


Reference to a fact never put in evidence. Given how little else Gary says actually holds up to scrutiny, asserting anyone should give the benefit of doubt is not justifiable.

     
Quote

Both are very different but still reduced down to what digital RAM can also do and without forgetting or needing reinforcement plus sleep to make a memory permanent.


If true, then the above accuses Gary of having done it wrong. It is, however, entirely consistent with the viewpoint that Gary is simply performing an animation, a system that graphically corresponds to another system with different operational dynamics.

     
Quote

Only difference is the critter has a memory that rivals rare people who can remember everything almost that well and never gets tired out then have to wait for it to wake up again.


"difference": Given that none of the rest of the supposed work is accessible or replicable, this is meaningless bafflegab.

   
Quote

I'm remaining true to what David modeled, which used digital RAM and a digital random generator to take a "guess" when "confidence level" goes to zero.


Heiserman didn't use "educated guess" to describe just that. Heiserman reserved that for his "gamma" memory update method, which was a prospective setting of memory for as-yet unexperienced conditions which was based on behavior acquired by experience. This is entirely absent from Gary's code, and shows that Gary is far from "true" to Heiserman.

Heiserman (1981, Robot Intelligence with Experiments, pp.20-21):

 
Quote

So in the evolutionary scheme of things, what comes after adding some memory to a system that is capable of responding to changes in its environment? Look at it this way. A purely Alpha-class machine exists in the moment. It has no way to work with events of the past or future. A Beta-class machine can call upon successful solutions to past problems in order to deal with the problems of the moment more effectively. What's missing? What is missing is teh[sic] creature's ability to anticipate events that might occur in the future.

A Gamma-class machine is one capable of generalizing from what it knows from first-hand experience to similar conditions not yet encountered in the environment. The machine works out sets of "educated guesses" regarding the nature of possible situations in the future, studies its own past experiences, and generalizes relevant elements of those experiences, saving them for a time when they might be needed.


Gary is not true to Heiserman. Beta-class is as far as Gary's code gets, which simply uses the Alpha-class mechanism when confidence is exhausted: choose a new response randomly. This is *not* what Heiserman uses "educated guess" to refer to, and Gary is wrong to represent himself as basing his "guess" terminology on Heiserman, when anyone can inspect Gary's code and determine that no Gamma-class operations are undertaken in it.

Gary:
   
Quote

My adapting to the labeling that Arnold Trehub used to label the same overall underlying circuit does not obligate me to use synaptic matrix or other method of your choice in place of what a PC already has to store memories.


It also doesn't require anyone to consider that Gary is actually applying Trehub's concepts in his work, or that Gary's work should be given any greater consideration because Trehub was a serious scholar, since Gary isn't actually implementing Trehub's systems.

   
Quote

It works just fine for testing things like the spatial reasoning network, which seems to not even matter to you. For some reason your petty quibbling comes before important science progress. Why is that?


Gary ignores that I have previously given my critique on this, and has long had my answer. Short recap: Gary's code has no biological plausibility. I thus do not consider it to be "important science progress". So far, at best it qualifies as an animation with no connection to the system it presents an emulation of.



But, as usual with Gary, all of that is entirely a digression from the topic of his critique of people relying on "old junk" and his inability to show that he himself is not in his target group.

All I've requested is that Gary demonstrate that the specific ideas he relies upon are of current utility to others beside himself. Gary is having a very difficult time doing something that should be utterly simple, would that he were relying on things that could be described as something other than "old junk".

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4907
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 25 2017,21:55   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Sep. 25 2017,19:04)
   
Quote (N.Wells @ Sep. 25 2017,14:19)
           
Quote (Henry J @ Sep. 24 2017,21:09)
Well, one should be quite careful about using "gamma" processes, considering what those did to Dr. Banner and B. Grim.

Again, it would be nice to have a "like" button.


See "Classes Of Robotic Self-Learning" that's right above David's picture. I checked the Source, and surprise!

cyberneticzoo.com/cyberneticanimals/1979-rodney-self-programming-robot-david-l-heiserman-american/

It's word for word from his book. My wife helped proofread it over and over again to make sure it's all there.  

Another way to explain it is: Gamma adds a subroutine to alter the properties of the RAM in a way that if what happened is similar to something else that did not yet happen then the same information is stored at more than one memory location. It's an interesting way to add some of the benefits of having a frontal cortex, but the model I'm working on needs to add that (and more) by using a brainwave powered spatial reasoning network and such.

Having a "Gamma" subroutine altering the contents of memory for systems that must have no changes made at all would just cause conflicts that crash the system.

   
Quote
Having a "Gamma" subroutine altering the contents of memory for systems that must have no changes made at all would just cause conflicts that crash the system.


It should come as no surprise to anyone that Gary's statement above is directly contradicted by Heiserman on pp.21 and 281 of his "Robot Intelligence" book.

   
Quote

Those Gamma-generated responses are bits and pieces of knowledge gained at various stages of its earlier life. The conjectured response is immediately tried whenever the occasion arises. If this response happens to work, the creature's confidence grows and it has additional information for firming up its notions about dealing with other future events. But in the event a conjectured response is partly or, in some instances, altogether wrong, the creature resorts to Alpha reflex activity.

The memory of a Gamma-class robot is in a state of continuous fluctuation and change, at least as long as it is interacting with a rich and dynamic environment. Put the machine into a sterile environment and you will find very little Gamma activity taking place. As a result, the creature will be largely unprepared to deal with unforeseen circumstances.


p. 281:

   
Quote

So portions of the creature's memory that carry confidence levels of 0 or 1 are loaded with suggested components of motion codes compiled in an earlier part of the subroutine. Responses carrying confidence levels of 2 or greater are not affected at all by the GAMMA FUNCTION subroutine.


In other words, a Gamma-class robot will never perform at a level lower than Beta-class, as it uses exactly the same fallback for handling incorrect responses. Heiserman also never envisaged Gamma processes as overturning good experience in his robots, contrary to Gary's claim. Gary has railed against people for dissing Heiserman in the past, but here we see Gary himself engage in clearly unwarranted critique of Heiserman. Plus, the "crash the system" part is ludicrous; the worst thing that ever happens in one of these systems is that an incorrect move is made, and that is handled without any such thing as a system crash. Gary will not be able to show that any such thing is justifiable on the basis of Heiserman's books.

So much for staying true to Heiserman; Gary doesn't even understand what Heiserman was saying.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5238
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 25 2017,22:54   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Sep. 25 2017,21:28)
All I've requested is that Gary demonstrate that the specific ideas he relies upon are of current utility to others beside himself. Gary is having a very difficult time doing something that should be utterly simple, would that he were relying on things that could be described as something other than "old junk".

I already spent well over 10 hours helping to plan a lasting response involving a relatively major publishing company, and experienced college educator who wrote 50 Heiserman influenced articles (one in particular may soon be online for you to see) and even Google Scholar, which only needs to know what to look for in articles where the methodology is "common knowledge" to find hundreds of ways his work is to this day being utilized.

Rome was not built in a day. But we're working on it. So be careful what you ask/wish for.

--------------
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.

   
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4907
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 25 2017,23:52   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Sep. 25 2017,22:54)
   
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Sep. 25 2017,21:28)
All I've requested is that Gary demonstrate that the specific ideas he relies upon are of current utility to others beside himself. Gary is having a very difficult time doing something that should be utterly simple, would that he were relying on things that could be described as something other than "old junk".

I already spent well over 10 hours helping to plan a lasting response involving a relatively major publishing company, and experienced college educator who wrote 50 Heiserman influenced articles (one in particular may soon be online for you to see) and even Google Scholar, which only needs to know what to look for in articles where the methodology is "common knowledge" to find hundreds of ways his work is to this day being utilized.

Rome was not built in a day. But we're working on it. So be careful what you ask/wish for.

Anything Gary touches doesn't relieve the possibility of self-delusion being operative. I've mentioned that before; Gary seems incapable of understanding that. "Others beside yourself", Gary.

And we have an ever-growing body of evidence that Gary, as stated previously, is merely trying to wrap himself in Heiserman's authority rather than actually implementing Heiserman's system that gets as far as an "educated guess". Given how badly Gary muffed even discussing it, it seems unlikely that Gary's code will reflect any such thing in the foreseeable future.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5238
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2017,00:33   

Refresher course:

The Go-Go's - Our Lips Are Sealed
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iwoiicch0Qs

--------------
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.

   
ChemiCat



Posts: 458
Joined: Nov. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2017,01:45   

Quote
Refresher course:


Another round lost in spectacular fashion! Back to the crappy music. It is easy to see why his "pirate radio" was shut down, he was polluting the airwaves as well as science.

Will it be much longer before the towel is thrown into the ring? How much more punishment can Gaulin take? Or does he enjoy "punishment"? His "fans" wait with bated breath for "Eye of the Tiger".

  
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5238
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2017,19:10   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Sep. 25 2017,23:52)
And we have an ever-growing body of evidence that Gary, as stated previously, is merely trying to wrap himself in Heiserman's authority rather than actually implementing Heiserman's system that gets as far as an "educated guess".

And FYI: the optional "Gamma" subroutine does not take guesses. The guess mechanism is in the "Beta" circuit, shown below.



--------------
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.

   
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5238
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2017,20:24   

Quote (ChemiCat @ Sep. 26 2017,01:45)
Will it be much longer before the towel is thrown into the ring? How much more punishment can Gaulin take? Or does he enjoy "punishment"? His "fans" wait with bated breath for "Eye of the Tiger".

If you were paying attention then you would know that the applicable anthem for this age has the "Eye of" something else:

AUTOMATICA 4k - Robots Vs. Music - Nigel Stanford
www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAdqazixuRY

--------------
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.

   
Dr.GH



Posts: 2139
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2017,21:08   

This man is insane. That seems simple enough.

   
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5238
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2017,23:16   

Quote (Dr.GH @ Sep. 27 2017,21:08)
This man is insane. That seems simple enough.

Was that compliment meant for Nigel or for myself?

--------------
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.

   
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4907
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 27 2017,23:34   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Sep. 26 2017,19:10)
     
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Sep. 25 2017,23:52)
And we have an ever-growing body of evidence that Gary, as stated previously, is merely trying to wrap himself in Heiserman's authority rather than actually implementing Heiserman's system that gets as far as an "educated guess".

And FYI: the optional "Gamma" subroutine does not take guesses. The guess mechanism is in the "Beta" circuit, shown below.


Gary either has discovered an *inconsistency* in Heiserman, or has goofed, or is lying. Heiserman, as I have quoted, uses "educated guess" to describe the effect of his Gamma-class updating system. Gary cannot set that positive demonstration aside. It is a fact. Gary's claim that it doesn't exist is simply incorrect. I'll repeat the demonstration:

Heiserman (1981, Robot Intelligence with Experiments, pp.20-21):

   
Quote

So in the evolutionary scheme of things, what comes after adding some memory to a system that is capable of responding to changes in its environment? Look at it this way. A purely Alpha-class machine exists in the moment. It has no way to work with events of the past or future. A Beta-class machine can call upon successful solutions to past problems in order to deal with the problems of the moment more effectively. What's missing? What is missing is teh[sic] creature's ability to anticipate events that might occur in the future.

A Gamma-class machine is one capable of generalizing from what it knows from first-hand experience to similar conditions not yet encountered in the environment. The machine works out sets of "educated guesses" regarding the nature of possible situations in the future, studies its own past experiences, and generalizes relevant elements of those experiences, saving them for a time when they might be needed.


Anyone else can examine the source and confirm that I have accurately communicated its contents.

Now, Gary claims that a diagram demonstrates Heiserman applying "guess" to Beta-class behavior. I have not been able to source the particular diagram Gary shows. I can, however, readily refer to Fig. 10-1, "General flowchart for FUNDAMENTAL BETA DEMO", from Heiserman 1982, "Projects in Machine Intelligence for Your Home Computer", pp.116-117. The figure does not say "GUESS" in the cases where an invalid memory response or blocked path are encountered; it says "FETCH RANDOM MOTION CODE". I believe the 1982 book is Heiserman's most recent on the topic and should represent his final form of thought concerning these matters. In variants of the Beta-class flowchart in the same work, Heiserman consistently uses the "fetch random motion code" phrasing. The text on p. 118 makes clear that the operational aspect Heiserman associates with that part of the flowchart is a form of trial and error. He does not employ "guess" in that text, either.

Heiserman:

     
Quote

The next step is to determine whether or not the motion code fetched from memory is valid. For the purposes of the present demonstration, the only invalid motion response is a stop code -- the code entered into all sections of the Beta memory during the INITIALIZE BETA SYSTEM operation.

If it turns out that the motion code picked up from Beta memory is invalid (a stop code), the system resorts to a bit of Alpha-like behavior and picks up a randomly generated motion code. That new motion code is then tested for validity. If it, too, is invalid, the system picks up another random motion code.

Sooner or later, the system finds a valid motion-code response to the current contact situation. The more first-hand experience the Beta has undergone in its environment, the greater the likelihood the response picked up from Beta memory will be valid.


Nor does the Beta flowchart from Heiserman 1981 on p.141 utilize "guess". It uses "FETCH NEW MOVE" instead of "FETCH RANDOM MOTION CODE", but the text following on pp.142-143 makes clear it is exactly the same process of using the Alpha mechanism of randomly choosing a new motion response that was described again in the later book.

Gary has delimited what he means by "guess" before:

Quote

can take a "guess" (not mutate)


The process Heiserman explicitly lays out for Alpha and Beta-class operations in the condition where Gary has put "guess" is, instead, exactly what one expects of random mutation.

So, Gary can clear up the publication and page where his diagram comes from (and potentially set up to demonstrate an inconsistency in Heiserman's description of his classes of behavior), or he can leave it unsourced and have us wondering if he is just making it up.

As for Gary saying "optional", that isn't anything I've seen Heiserman say about it. Heiserman certainly is cognizant that not everyone would be willing to construct robots with the additional complexity that his Gamma-class capabilities require, but that, I suspect, is not the meaning of "optional" Gary is attempting to use. Gary appears to not understand Gamma-class operations, and thus has not attempted to implement them in his work, but if Gary wants to utilize "guess" and claim it has the context of having come from Heiserman, he would need to conform his usage to how Heiserman deployed it. I still have encountered no reference to "guess" used by Heiserman in relation to Beta-class operations.

In any case, Gary's all-too-apparent unfamiliarity with the content of Heiserman with respect to Gamma-class machines, as demonstrated by his confident but false claims about it, makes him look like a poseur.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5238
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2017,00:39   

Wesley, it is (in a bad way) insane sounding for you to have a problem using the word "GUESS" to label a mechanism that takes a guess. Especially since that's now standard MI terminology.

Sabotaging the work of others is a very creepy thing to do. And I could easily enough trash your staggering zombie model, but so far chose not to.

--------------
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.

   
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4907
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2017,05:32   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Sep. 28 2017,00:39)
Wesley, it is (in a bad way) insane sounding for you to have a problem using the word "GUESS" to label a mechanism that takes a guess. Especially since that's now standard MI terminology.

Sabotaging the work of others is a very creepy thing to do. And I could easily enough trash your staggering zombie model, but so far chose not to.


I haven't sabotaged anything. I haven't altered a line of Gary's text or code. I have engaged in critique of both, noting a variety of errors, misstatements, omissions, and other issues. Gary seems to think this is somehow a bad thing.

Gary has attempted to draw a distinction between "mutate" and "guess", as I have quoted before. Here's another instance of Gary making the distinction:

 
Quote

The phrase �natural selection� is a subjective generalization that is impossible to precisely quantify. This theory instead requires specific terminology from cognitive science to be able to explain the tenacious self-learning mechanisms of intelligent living things which more specifically "learn" (not select/selected) and can take a "guess� (not mutate) and over time physically �develop� (not evolve).


Gary has invoked Heiserman as his authority for making such a distinction. And, indeed, Heiserman does use "educated guess" to refer to a process involving introspection and prospective, inductive use of prior experience to set possible future actions, a process that is rather far removed from selection of one of a number of alternatives at random using a uniform distribution. Unfortunately for Gary, Gary hasn't actually implemented the process that Heiserman refers to as an "educated guess".  I have quoted Heiserman at some length on the topic of what process he used under the phrasing of "guess", and what process he used for operation in both Alpha and Beta-class robots.

I welcome Gary's current admission that his prior stance that he was attempting to distinguish "guess" from "mutate" was, in fact, specious, and that he instead meant "guess" merely in the vernacular of choosing an alternative at random. That clears that up. Gary, to remain consistent, should now remove any text that confusingly invokes Heiserman as if Heiserman similarly had such a vague deployment of the term, alter his "diagram" accordingly, and remove the parenthetical aside after "guess" that distinguishes that word from mutation, since Gary now disavows any such distinction as "(in a bad way) insane-sounding". One would think Gary should want to avoid that.

As for Gary not making comments on my work, well, we have this thread that says that he has already attempted to trash-talk my work specifically with the intention that I should provide Gary a basis to undertake litigation against me over it. That is super-creepy. The attempts Gary has made previously have been as feeble and as ill-informed as Gary's recent attacks on Heiserman, and I'm satisfied that I have adequately responded to them. That Gary would engage in a repetition of mistaken and ill-informed commentary isn't something I would say I look forward to, but it certainly doesn't fill me with dread, either.

And, of course, it would be a digression from the topic at hand, which is Gary's apparent inability to demonstrate that he himself is not relying on "old junk" as he accuses others of doing.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5238
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2017,06:47   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Sep. 28 2017,05:32)
ary has invoked Heiserman as his authority for making such a distinction.

That's Bullshit.

--------------
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.

   
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4907
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2017,08:35   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Sep. 28 2017,06:47)
 
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Sep. 28 2017,05:32)
ary has invoked Heiserman as his authority for making such a distinction.

That's Bullshit.

Gary, 2013/03/20:

 
Quote

The core computer model of this theory was reduced/simplified by experimentation with (primarily) Beta Class intelligence generating algorithm from Heiserman, D. L., in the book �How to Build Your Own Self-Programming Robot�, Blue Ridge Summit, PA, TAB Books, Inc., 1979.


Gary, 2013/02/20:

 
Quote

David Heiserman considered all three classes (Alpha, Beta and Gamma) to be intelligent. �The theory had to conclude that Alpha is best described as protointelligence. The theory easily qualifies Beta (and Gamma which only has additional guess mechanisms) to be intelligent.


Gary, 2013/04/07:

 
Quote

I'm using a model where random or not it's called a "guess" and I am not at liberty to change that. Talk to David Heiserman and others, not me, because I'm just going by the science that's already there.


Gary, following my earlier summary of the situation with Heiserman and "guess", 2013/04/08:

 
Quote

If you have a better phrase than "good guess" for what I explained then let me know, otherwise I have to stay focused on the new software. No time for another mudslinging contest.


Gary did not object that Heiserman wasn't his source for what "guess" meant then.

Gary, 2013/06/20:

 
Quote

To win against humans on a hard game show requires hypothesis generation like I now explain (where that is) in the comments for the new Lab with link to PBS article on babies and other things of interest found along the way to help hook it in, but would need Wesley or someone for that because Digital RAM from a simple array makes getting the GUESS connected in just right real easy. There is only one way it works real good, otherwise does not work at all but may seem so because of it still aiming at food but otherwise a guided missile zombie that bashes into food all right but RAM is not properly working with GUESS, is not intelligent. That's what happens when all the checkboxes for sensory  are unchecked, nothing being addressed hence no RAM in the circuit. In fact I just tried it with the version I'm now getting ready to upload that has error control and should be stable. It's quite hilarious in comparison, without RAM and therefore GUESS not working together, from having no RAM at all anymore in the circuit. It's simple feedback control from CONFIDENCE into GUESS that qualifies as per David Heiserman "Alpha-Class machine" and I would say random protointelligence but in a way it's not yet intelligent from having RAM to turn all the guesses into knowledge of its environment that it needs to intelligently get around.


After I outlined the distinction Heiserman made between Beta and Gamma processes, Gary said (2014/12/19):

 
Quote

The two systems are systematically identical, Wesley.


and re-posted the diagram with "GUESS"  in a box.



If Gary wishes to stick by his withdrawal of using Heiserman to distinguish "guess" from "mutation", that would be fine by me. Until I see the relevant changes in his text and code, though, I'll assume he is trying to have it both ways.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
ChemiCat



Posts: 458
Joined: Nov. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2017,09:15   

Quote
That's Bullshit.

--------------
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.


I couldn't agree more!

Damn, I'm agreeing with Gaulin, I need a large single Malt and a lie-down to recover.

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4907
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2017,12:22   

I'll note that Gary didn't provide a reference in Heiserman's work as to where one may find the diagram with the word "GUESS" in it that unequivocally refers to Beta-class operations.

I'm taking that to mean it doesn't actually exist. Gary could prove me wrong (if I were wrong) by citing the publication and page number.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
Henry J



Posts: 4815
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2017,13:50   

BR 549, page 404 ?

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2602
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2017,13:53   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Sep. 28 2017,10:22)
I'll note that Gary didn't provide a reference in Heiserman's work as to where one may find the diagram with the word "GUESS" in it that unequivocally refers to Beta-class operations.

I'm taking that to mean it doesn't actually exist. Gary could prove me wrong (if I were wrong) by citing the publication and page number.



--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

"I am in a rush to catch up with science work." -- Gary Gaulin

  
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5238
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2017,17:48   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Sep. 28 2017,12:22)
I'll note that Gary didn't provide a reference in Heiserman's work as to where one may find the diagram with the word "GUESS" in it that unequivocally refers to Beta-class operations.

I'm taking that to mean it doesn't actually exist. Gary could prove me wrong (if I were wrong) by citing the publication and page number.

David Heiserman did not draw a block diagram for each of systems. He did though make sure that there was enough information for the reader to do so.

You'll have to study the code, like I and others had to.

--------------
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.

   
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5238
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2017,18:18   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Sep. 28 2017,08:35)
Gary, 2013/02/20:

     
Quote

David Heiserman considered all three classes (Alpha, Beta and Gamma) to be intelligent. �The theory had to conclude that Alpha is best described as protointelligence. The theory easily qualifies Beta (and Gamma which only has additional guess mechanisms) to be intelligent.

In that one I should have been more clear about the Gamma subroutine improving the quality of later responses/guesses, without need for a random response (guess) mechanism found in the Beta.

--------------
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.

   
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4907
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2017,20:37   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Sep. 28 2017,17:48)
 
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Sep. 28 2017,12:22)
I'll note that Gary didn't provide a reference in Heiserman's work as to where one may find the diagram with the word "GUESS" in it that unequivocally refers to Beta-class operations.

I'm taking that to mean it doesn't actually exist. Gary could prove me wrong (if I were wrong) by citing the publication and page number.

David Heiserman did not draw a block diagram for each of systems. He did though make sure that there was enough information for the reader to do so.

You'll have to study the code, like I and others had to.

Gary (referring to his own diagram):

 
Quote

And FYI: the optional "Gamma" subroutine does not take guesses. The guess mechanism is in the "Beta" circuit, shown below.


I've read Heiserman, and I've read Gaulin. I've quoted Heiserman on Gamma and how he describes it as making "educated guesses", and I've pointed out where Heiserman's flowcharts and explication for Beta lay out random choice and do not say "guess". Gary was flat out wrong on Gamma, and has stipulated that what he gave as supposed evidence on Beta is his own invention and nothing of Heiserman's.

Gary can't show me to be wrong, because I'm not wrong.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5238
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2017,20:50   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Sep. 28 2017,20:37)
I've quoted Heiserman on Gamma and how he describes it as making "educated guesses", and I've pointed out where Heiserman's flowcharts and explication for Beta lay out random choice and do not say "guess".

How David Heiserman describes Gamma as making "educated guesses" does not make it wrong to call a mechanism that generates a random response (when it needs to take a guess) a "GUESS" in a circuit that I had to draw, based upon ALL applicable models that parallel Heiserman's

You are going in circles in order to make it appear that you have a valid argument. Mudslinger......

--------------
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.

   
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4907
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 28 2017,21:19   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Sep. 28 2017,20:50)
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Sep. 28 2017,20:37)
I've quoted Heiserman on Gamma and how he describes it as making "educated guesses", and I've pointed out where Heiserman's flowcharts and explication for Beta lay out random choice and do not say "guess".

How David Heiserman describes Gamma as making "educated guesses" does not make it wrong to call a mechanism that generates a random response (when it needs to take a guess) a "GUESS" in a circuit that I had to draw, based upon ALL applicable models that parallel Heiserman's

You are going in circles in order to make it appear that you have a valid argument. Mudslinger......

Reiterating the point that Gary (1) relies on Heiserman but (2) gets Heiserman *wrong* is not a circle.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
  18219 replies since Oct. 31 2012,02:32 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (608) < ... 597 598 599 600 601 [602] 603 604 605 606 607 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]