Re: Supercompiled Perl
[email protected] ("Valentin Turchin")
| Newsgroups | perl.ai |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
-----Original Message----- From: Helmut Enck-Radana <[email protected]> Date: Wednesday, August 08, 2001 03:51 PM >At 20:21 08-08-01, Tom Fawcett wrote: >>This is an interesting topic but it seems unrelated to artificial >>intelligence using Perl. > >One of the traditional topics of AI is to find ways to generate >implementations from specifications. While this is not possible in general, >there are enough situations where executable specifications are only too >inefficient to be useful. Let's say you write a specification for your >application in a specification language which is restricted such that it is >possible to implement an interpreter for this language. Even if you used a >low-level language to implement this interpreter, the execution of the >specification could be too slow. But you write this interpreter in your >preferred high-level language (which could perhaps be Perl) and apply a >supercompiler to this interpreter together with your specification as >input. Imagine the resulting program would be efficient enough to be used >instead of a hand-coded program. This would be a solution to a classic AI >problem. > >I am interested in comments of the supercompiler specialists on how >realistic/unrealistic my scenario is. > >-- Helmut Hi, Helmut, Your scenario is in the mainstream of the use of supercompilers, and you formulated it precisely. Up to now we have dealt with the case where the specifications are those of an algorithm, but we think of trying some AI applications. I thought of a general criterion of how effective the supercompilation will be. It is this: if the role of specificaiton remains essential at all stages of the construction of a solution, then we can expect that the effect of supercompilation will be big; otherwise the radical improvement is unlikely. Specification of an algorithm obviously satisfies this criterion; but theorem proving from the first principles does not. Indeed, specification here is the list of axioms, while the progress towards the proof depends on the total list of true statements, in which the axioms constitute a progressively smaller part, relatively. Best regards. Valentin Turchin.