Reasoning? Or just better programming?

What does make the world turn?
User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2064
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Reasoning? Or just better programming?

Postby Nikki Nyx » Mon Jun 19, 2017 9:52 pm

How many parks are near the new home you’re thinking of buying? What’s the best dinner-wine pairing at a restaurant? These everyday questions require relational reasoning, an important component of higher thought that has been difficult for artificial intelligence (AI) to master. Now, researchers at Google’s DeepMind have developed a simple algorithm to handle such reasoning—and it has already beaten humans at a complex image comprehension test.

Humans are generally pretty good at relational reasoning, a kind of thinking that uses logic to connect and compare places, sequences, and other entities. But the two main types of AI—statistical and symbolic—have been slow to develop similar capacities. Statistical AI, or machine learning, is great at pattern recognition, but not at using logic. And symbolic AI can reason about relationships using predetermined rules, but it’s not great at learning on the fly.

The new study proposes a way to bridge the gap: an artificial neural network for relational reasoning. Similar to the way neurons are connected in the brain, neural nets stitch together tiny programs that collaboratively find patterns in data. They can have specialized architectures for processing images, parsing language, or even learning games. In this case, the new “relation network” is wired to compare every pair of objects in a scenario individually. “We’re explicitly forcing the network to discover the relationships that exist between the objects,” says Timothy Lillicrap, a computer scientist at DeepMind in London who co-authored the paper.

He and his team challenged their relation network with several tasks. The first was to answer questions about relationships between objects in a single image, such as cubes, balls, and cylinders. For example: “There is an object in front of the blue thing; does it have the same shape as the tiny cyan thing that is to the right of the gray metal ball?” For this task, the relation network was combined with two other types of neural nets: one for recognizing objects in the image, and one for interpreting the question. Over many images and questions, other machine-learning algorithms were right 42% to 77% of the time. Humans scored a respectable 92%. The new relation network combo was correct 96% of the time, a superhuman score, the researchers report in a paper posted last week on the preprint server arXiv.

Read the article here.

Does this qualify as reasoning? Or does it only resemble reasoning?
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11013
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Reasoning? Or just better programming?

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Jun 20, 2017 12:59 am

I don't get it. The number of parks near your house is a matter of simple addition. No skills involved.

Dinner-Wine parings is complete and total BS meant to provide customers with a false appreciation of over-hyped grape juice. I drink Sangiovese with all meals. Sometimes for variety a nice semi dry white from the Rhone Valley. There is no "logic" to this..... only taste buds.
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2064
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Reasoning? Or just better programming?

Postby Nikki Nyx » Tue Jun 20, 2017 1:29 am

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:I don't get it. The number of parks near your house is a matter of simple addition. No skills involved.

Dinner-Wine parings is complete and total BS meant to provide customers with a false appreciation of over-hyped grape juice. I drink Sangiovese with all meals. Sometimes for variety a nice semi dry white from the Rhone Valley. There is no "logic" to this..... only taste buds.

I agree with both points. What about the last paragraph of the article as it relates to my question?
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10207
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Reasoning? Or just better programming?

Postby Lance Kennedy » Tue Jun 20, 2017 4:50 am

Not sure of the point of this, Luna. Is it your headline query ? If so, I have to ask "is there a difference ?"

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2064
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Reasoning? Or just better programming?

Postby Nikki Nyx » Tue Jun 20, 2017 5:31 pm

Yes. Is there a difference?
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
True Skeptic
Posts: 10510
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: Reasoning? Or just better programming?

Postby OlegTheBatty » Tue Jun 20, 2017 7:27 pm

Program = template
Reasoning = process

Better template causes better process.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10207
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Reasoning? Or just better programming?

Postby Lance Kennedy » Tue Jun 20, 2017 8:36 pm

Our reasoning is the result of our programming.

User avatar
TJrandom
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7616
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:55 am
Location: Pacific coast outside of Tokyo bay.
Contact:

Re: Reasoning? Or just better programming?

Postby TJrandom » Tue Jun 20, 2017 9:04 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:Our reasoning is the result of our programming.


Our programming is the result of our reasoning. :oldman: Says a very old programmer - wire board, machine, ALGOL, BAL, FORTRAN, COBOL, RPG, SPS, etc.

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2064
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Reasoning? Or just better programming?

Postby Nikki Nyx » Tue Jun 20, 2017 9:38 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:Our reasoning is the result of our programming.
Ours is. What about this new algorithm? Does it constitute reasoning?

I'm not trying to be difficult. I know very little about the technical side of computers, and my programming knowledge is limited to HTML, CSS, and Javascript (as it relates to websites). Honestly, I disagree with even calling this "programming knowledge." I'm not telling the computer what to do; I'm merely telling the browser what to display, when and how to display it, and where I've stored the files.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
Lance Kennedy
True Skeptic
Posts: 10207
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 10:20 pm
Custom Title: Super Skeptic
Location: Paradise, New Zealand

Re: Reasoning? Or just better programming?

Postby Lance Kennedy » Tue Jun 20, 2017 9:47 pm

Luna

I think that the reasoning process is always a result of programming, for human or computer. If a computer and it's programming is sophisticated enough, the result is indistinguishable from reasoning, so why try to make a distinction?

bobbo_the_Pragmatist
Has No Life
Posts: 11013
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2015 9:39 am

Re: Reasoning? Or just better programming?

Postby bobbo_the_Pragmatist » Tue Jun 20, 2017 10:30 pm

LunaNik wrote: I agree with both points. What about the last paragraph of the article as it relates to my question?

I only read once, but "a question" doesn't really pop out at me.

For instance: "Doing so might require comparing not just pairs of things, but triplets, pairs of pairs, or only some pairs in a larger set (for efficiency). //// I don't know..but seems to me a computer, if not our brains and we just don't know it, could still go thru all possible "pairings" available, score them, then add them up?

Is this "reasoning?" Only if it picks Sangiovese. ((aka: agrees with me))
Real Name: bobbo the existential pragmatic evangelical anti-theist and Class Warrior.
Asking: What is the most good for the most people?
Sample Issue: Should the Feds provide all babies with free diapers?

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2064
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Reasoning? Or just better programming?

Postby Nikki Nyx » Tue Jun 20, 2017 11:47 pm

bobbo_the_Pragmatist wrote:
LunaNik wrote: I agree with both points. What about the last paragraph of the article as it relates to my question?

I only read once, but "a question" doesn't really pop out at me.

For instance: "Doing so might require comparing not just pairs of things, but triplets, pairs of pairs, or only some pairs in a larger set (for efficiency). //// I don't know..but seems to me a computer, if not our brains and we just don't know it, could still go thru all possible "pairings" available, score them, then add them up?

Is this "reasoning?" Only if it picks Sangiovese. ((aka: agrees with me))

An interesting perspective. It's not very useful if it picks something you dislike, is it? Or even picks something based on a theory with which you disagree. Like white wine with poultry...why? Coq au Vin works just fine, and I prefer red wine.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
True Skeptic
Posts: 10510
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: Reasoning? Or just better programming?

Postby OlegTheBatty » Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:09 pm

LunaNik wrote:
Lance Kennedy wrote:Our reasoning is the result of our programming.
Ours is. What about this new algorithm? Does it constitute reasoning?


A program, whether biological or mechanical, is a set of arguments. It doesn't matter if the arguments are in series, parallel, or a combination of both. Reasoning is the process of negotiating those arguments.

You might note that the arguments don't have to be valid - fallacious arguments are still arguments.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2064
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Reasoning? Or just better programming?

Postby Nikki Nyx » Wed Jun 21, 2017 5:44 pm

OlegTheBatty wrote:
LunaNik wrote:
Lance Kennedy wrote:Our reasoning is the result of our programming.
Ours is. What about this new algorithm? Does it constitute reasoning?


A program, whether biological or mechanical, is a set of arguments. It doesn't matter if the arguments are in series, parallel, or a combination of both. Reasoning is the process of negotiating those arguments.

You might note that the arguments don't have to be valid - fallacious arguments are still arguments.

Thanks, Oleg! That's a sensible explanation. So, a flowchart would be an example of a series of arguments? A serial argument? (Unless it concerned the relative benefits of breakfast grains, in which case it would be a cereal argument. ;) )
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

User avatar
OlegTheBatty
True Skeptic
Posts: 10510
Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 2:35 pm
Custom Title: Uppity Atheist

Re: Reasoning? Or just better programming?

Postby OlegTheBatty » Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:10 pm

LunaNik wrote: (Unless it concerned the relative benefits of breakfast grains, in which case it would be a cereal argument. ;) )


A grain of truth? . . . or a groan of truth? . . . it's so hard to tell.
. . . with the satisfied air of a man who thinks he has an idea of his own because he has commented on the idea of another . . . - Alexandre Dumas 'The Count of Monte Cristo"

There is no statement so absurd that it has not been uttered by some philosopher. - Cicero

User avatar
Nikki Nyx
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2064
Joined: Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:40 am
Custom Title: cognitively consonant
Location: playing croquet in Wonderland

Re: Reasoning? Or just better programming?

Postby Nikki Nyx » Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:56 pm

OlegTheBatty wrote:
LunaNik wrote: (Unless it concerned the relative benefits of breakfast grains, in which case it would be a cereal argument. ;) )


A grain of truth? . . . or a groan of truth? . . . it's so hard to tell.

LOL...I can't resist them when I see them.
What are the facts? Again and again and again-what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history”--what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!
—Lazarus Long, from Time Enough for Love, by Robert A. Heinlein

Electro432
New Member
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:09 pm

Re: Reasoning? Or just better programming?

Postby Electro432 » Sun Jul 02, 2017 6:10 pm

Lance Kennedy wrote:
I think that the reasoning process is always a result of programming, for human or computer. If a computer and it's programming is sophisticated enough, the result is indistinguishable from reasoning, so why try to make a distinction?


A result of predictive programming?
"One's eyes are what one is; one's mouth, what one becomes."
Galsworthy

"The idealist walks on tiptoe, the materialist on his heels."
Chazal


Return to “Science, Technology, and Mathematics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest