Thinking more on this topic... I mentioned that comprehension is a subset of understanding. I think it is more accurate to say that comprehension requires understanding and experience. Comprehension is about understanding facts and relating them to prior experience in order to forecast goals and motivations. That last bit is tricky.
Every time I start to distil perceptive mechanisms, I try to take a step back to see how this will work in the conversation engine. The goal of the conversation engine is to behave like a human within the confines of text. The engine cannot see, hear, taste, touch or smell. It quite literally is a brain in a box. It's only sense is it's method of communication - text.
Optimally, I would like the engine to learn to speak on it's own by using the mimed human logic that I am trying to divine here. Unfortunately, I'm not sure that could happen quickly enough to be practical, so I have to establish a base grammar. That base grammar can change over time, (it should not be immutable) but to start with there must be words with established meaning. I suppose I don't think language can evolve naturally because without a base grammar, there is no way for the engine to distinguish one word from another.
Hmmm... I take that back. The engine could have base character rules that could lead to word and language understanding, but that will be much more complex than starting with a system that can understand some basic words.
Honestly, these are the easy problems. I am going to have a much harder time figuring out how to quantify words and how to manage understanding and comprehension. My goal is to discover simple rules and build little engines to test those rules. I don't have the first rule yet... Just some interesting properties. To be honest I am having a hard time even putting all of the pieces on the table - to say nothing of putting them together.
No comments:
Post a Comment