Non-axiomatic reasoning system: exploring the essence of intelligence

Every artificial-intelligence research project needs a working definition of "intelligence", on which the deepest goals and assumptions of the research are based. In the project described in the following chapters, "intelligence" is defined as the capacity to adapt under insufficient knowledge and resources. Concretely, an intelligent system should be finite and open, and should work in real time. If these criteria are used in the design of a reasoning system, the result is NARS, a non-axiomatic reasoning system. NARS uses a term-oriented formal language, characterized by the use of subject-predicate sentences. The language has an experience-grounded semantics, according to which the truth value of a judgment is determined by previous experience, and the meaning of a term is determined by its relations with other terms. Several different types of uncertainty, such as randomness, fuzziness, and ignorance, can be represented in the language in a single way. The inference rules of NARS are based on three inheritance relations between terms. With different combinations of premises, revision, deduction, induction, abduction, exemplification, comparison, and analogy can all be carried out in a uniform format, the major difference between these types of inference being that different functions are used to calculate the truth value of the conclusion from the truth values of the premises. Since it has insufficient space-time resources, the system needs to distribute them among its tasks very carefully, and to dynamically adjust the distribution as the situation changes. This leads to a "controlled concurrency" control mechanism, and a "bag-based" memory organization. A recent implementation of the NARS model, with examples, is discussed. The system has many interesting properties that are shared by human cognition, but are absent from conventional computational models of reasoning. This research sheds light on several notions in artificial intelligence and cognitive science, including symbol-grounding, induction, categorization, logic, and computation. These are discussed to show the implications of the new theory of intelligence. Finally, the major results of the research are summarized, a preliminary evaluation of the working definition of intelligence is given, and the limitations and future extensions of the research are discussed.

[1]  Ronald R. Yager,et al.  Credibility discounting in the theory of approximate reasoning , 1990, UAI.

[2]  Joseph Y. Halpern.  An Analysis of First-Order Logics of Probability , 1989, IJCAI.

[3]  N. Cocchiarella,et al.  Situations and Attitudes. , 1986 .

[4]  J. Barnes.  The Prior Analytics , 1990, The Classical Review.

[5]  Judea Pearl,et al.  Probabilistic reasoning in intelligent systems , 1988 .

[6]  Pei Wang,et al.  Belief Revision in Probability Theory , 1993, UAI.

[7]  James L. McClelland,et al.  PDP models and general issues in cognitive science , 1986 .

[8]  P. Smolensky.  On the proper treatment of connectionism , 1988, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[9]  John McCarthy,et al.  What Computers Still Can't Do , 1996, Artif. Intell..

[10]  John H. Holland,et al.  Escaping brittleness: the possibilities of general-purpose learning algorithms applied to parallel rule-based systems , 1995 .

[11]  E. Rosch.  ON THE INTERNAL STRUCTURE OF PERCEPTUAL AND SEMANTIC CATEGORIES1 , 1973 .

[12]  Henry E. Kyburg,,et al.  The Reference Class , 1983, Philosophy of Science.

[13]  Haim Gaifman,et al.  A Theory of Higher Order Probabilities , 1986, TARK.

[14]  Ryszard S. Michalski,et al.  A Theory and Methodology of Inductive Learning , 1983, Artificial Intelligence.

[15]  Pei Wang,et al.  On the Working De nition of Intelligence , 1995 .

[16]  Robert M. Fung,et al.  Metaprobability and Dempster-Shafer in Evidential Reasoning , 2013, UAI.

[17]  Gerhard Paass.  Second order probabilities for uncertain and conflicting evidence , 1990, UAI.

[18]  David H. Krantz,et al.  From Indices to Mappings: The Representational Approach to Measurement , 1991 .

[19]  Henry E. Kyburg,et al.  Higher order probabilities and intervals , 1988, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[20]  R. Penrose,et al.  Shadows of the Mind , 1994 .

[21]  Jay K. Strosnider,et al.  A Structured View of Real-Time Problem Solving , 1994, AI Mag..

[22]  G. Edelman,et al.  Real brains and artificial intelligence , 1989 .

[23]  John R. Searle,et al.  Minds, brains, and programs , 1980, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[24]  Pei Wang.  A Uniied Treatment of Uncertainties , 1993 .

[25]  B. Sauphanor.  The logical foundations of statistical inference , 1974 .

[26]  Didier Dubois,et al.  A class of fuzzy measures based on triangular norms , 1982 .

[27]  Rudolf Carnap,et al.  The continuum of inductive methods , 1952 .

[28]  Glenn Shafer,et al.  Perspectives on the theory and practice of belief functions , 1990, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[29]  David S. Touretzky,et al.  The Mathematics of Inheritance Systems , 1984 .

[30]  Lawrence Birnbaum,et al.  Rigor Mortis: A Response to Nilsson's "Logic and Artificial Intelligence" , 1991, Artif. Intell..

[31]  R. Nosofsky,et al.  Typicality in logically defined categories: Exemplar-similarity versus rule instantiation , 1991, Memory & cognition.

[32]  Pei Wang.  A Defect in Dempster-Shafer Theory , 1994, UAI.

[33]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[34]  P. Kugel,et al.  Thinking may be more than computing , 1986, Cognition.

[35]  D. Palermo,et al.  The Nature and Ontogenesis of Meaning , 2023 .

[36]  Robert A. Kowalski,et al.  Logic for problem solving , 1982, The computer science library : Artificial intelligence series.

[37]  Pei Wang.  From inheritance relation to nonaxiomatic logic , 1994, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[38]  J. M. Bocheński,et al.  A history of formal logic , 1961 .

[39]  I. Good.  Good Thinking: The Foundations of Probability and Its Applications , 1983 .

[40]  P. L. Adams.  THE ORIGINS OF INTELLIGENCE IN CHILDREN , 1976 .

[41]  C. Peirce,et al.  Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce , 1936, Nature.

[42]  Pei Wang.  Reference Classes and Multiple Inheritances , 1995, Int. J. Uncertain. Fuzziness Knowl. Based Syst..

[43]  Piero P. Bonissone,et al.  Summarizing and propagating uncertain information with triangular norms , 1990, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[44]  David Kirsh,et al.  Foundations of AI: The Big Issues , 1991, Artif. Intell..

[45]  D. Hofstadter.  On seeing A's and seeing As , 1995 .

[46]  C. Hartshorne,et al.  Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce , 1935, Nature.

[47]  Pei Wang.  A Uni ed Treatment of Uncertainties , 1993 .

[48]  Pei Wang.  Comparing Categorization Models | A psychological experiment , 1993 .

[49]  Pei Wang,et al.  Heuristics and normative models of judgment under uncertainty , 1996, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[50]  Douglas Hofstadter,et al.  The Copycat Project: An Experiment in Nondeterminism and Creative Analogies , 1984 .

[51]  G. Reeke.  Marvin Minsky, The Society of Mind , 1991, Artif. Intell..

[52]  H. Jeffreys.  A Treatise on Probability , 1922, Nature.

[53]  Grigoris Antoniou,et al.  Nonmonotonic reasoning , 1997 .

[54]  Mark S. Boddy,et al.  Deliberation Scheduling for Problem Solving in Time-Constrained Environments , 1994, Artif. Intell..

[55]  Pei Wang,et al.  The interpretation of fuzziness , 1996, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part B.

[56]  A. M. Turing,et al.  Computing Machinery and Intelligence , 1950, The Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence.

[57]  H. Jeffreys.  Logical Foundations of Probability , 1952, Nature.

[58]  Ronald J. Brachman,et al.  What IS-A Is and Isn't: An Analysis of Taxonomic Links in Semantic Networks , 1983, Computer.

[59]  J. McCawley,et al.  Language, Thought, and Logic , 1995 .

[60]  David J. Chalmers,et al.  High-level perception, representation, and analogy: a critique of artificial intelligence methodology , 1992, J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell..

[61]  Kurt Weichselberger,et al.  A Methodology for Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems , 1990, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[62]  Lotfi A. Zadeh,et al.  Test-score semantics as a basis for a computational approach to the representation of meaning , 1986 .

[63]  Douglas R. Hofstadter.  How Could a Copycat Ever be Creative , 1994 .

[64]  Henry E. Kyburg,et al.  Semantics for Probabilistic Inference , 1992, UAI.