RE: An ML:: namespace?

> the algorithms are "intelligent" but actually "not intelligent".
> Something like "AttemptedIntelligence::" or "AllegedlyIntelligent::". 

Isn't the Holy Grail to create (hence Artificial) something that is "really"
Intelligent? Doesn't Artificial Intelligence describe the goal, and the
things that go within that namespace contribute to that goal?
I don't think anyone doing research on space navigation would look at
"InterstellarTravel::" and expect that the stuff there actually resulted in
someone going to another star.
I do realize the media have sensationalized Artificial Intelligence to the
point of pseudo-science, but people actually doing research in the field
won't have such silly notions. (Will they?)
If the goal is not Artificial Intelligence, then maybe you need a namespace
describing what it is, instead of what it is working towards. Would
"KnowledgeProcessing::" cover the things currently there? (It's beyond me
how anyone will ever find anything under a new term like Knowledge
Processing, but I'm doing my best to give the community options. I actually
think "Knowledge-based Processing" would be even more appropriate, but
that's way too long, and "KBP::" would be so ambiguous that you could give
up hope of anyone ever finding anything there.)
----
Where do forest rangers go to get away from it all?


		-----Original Message-----
		From:	jpnolan [mailto:[email protected]]
		Sent:	Tuesday April 30, 2002 13:31
		To:	[email protected]
		Subject:	Re: An ML:: namespace?


		> --- Ken Williams <[email protected]> wrote:
		> >   1) "AI" is sort of a loaded term, and attracts its
		> > fair share of wackos.  For this reason, many researchers

		> > eschew it.
		> > 
		> >   2) Many interesting things would fit better into
		> > "Machine Learning" than they would into AI, just because

		> > they don't really claim to be "intelligent", but they 
		> > do learn from  observed data.
		 
		> On Mon, 22 Apr 2002, Tolkin, Steve wrote:
		> > There are many other terms that cover some or most
		> > of this area -- but only AI has 
		> > widespread name recognition.


		Speaking for myself, I just don't like the term
		"artificial intelligence," for the same reasons that other
		folks dislike it.  So I would agree with the other posters, 
		that another top-level category might be a good idea.  

		However, I think some of the same complaints also apply 
		to the term "ML::" or "MachineLearning::".   What does
		"learning" really mean? 

		In theory I like the idea of eliminating the term 'AI',
		however, I don't know what new name would be 
		a good general replacement.  :(

		My hunch is that there is an approprate term out there
somewhere,
		but we haven't thought of it yet.  The name has to say that
		the algorithms are "intelligent" but actually "not
intelligent".
		Something like "AttemptedIntelligence::" or
"AllegedlyIntelligent::". 

		Or maybe "HAL-wanna-be::".  :)


		-- 
		#-------------------------
		# John Nolan
		# jpnolan sonic net
		#-------------------------