3 ms·
Yes I agree with all your points - I was however responding to the point being made that symbolic AI "wasn't useful"...which in the past it was. Perhaps in the
by CodeGlitch 5y ago
Yes I agree with all your points - I was however responding to the point being made that symbolic AI "wasn't useful"...which in the past it was. Perhaps in the future some new method or breakthrough will mean it becomes useful once again?
- panabee 5y agothis is a great point. much like deep learning was invented decades ago but didn't become feasible until technology caught up, could the same be true for symbolic AI? i.e., is the ceiling for symbolic AI technical and transient or fundamental and permanent?
- PeterisP 5y agoMy feeling is that even in our own thinking symbols are used mostly to communicate our (inherently non-symbolic) thoughts to others or record them; i.e. they are a solution to a bandwidth-limited transfer of information while the actual thinking process happens with concepts that have more similarity to collections of vague parameters and associations which can be compressed to symbols only imperfectly with losses. From that perspective, I don't see how symbolic AI would be competitive but there would be a role for symbolic AI in designing systems that can be comprehensible for humans, but perhaps just as a distillation/compression output from a non-symbolic system. I.e. have a strong "black box" ML system that learns to solve a task, and then have it construct a symbolic system that solves that task worse, but in an explainable way.