>>12Also, the NN and statistical based AI push that everybody's in is shit, so anybody looking at a conceptual basis to AI will always look smarter than the "state of the art" garbage.
I completely agree. There
is an actual interesting cognitive model I read about years ago. It was created by Douglas Hofstadter and Melanie Mitchell and described in the book "Fluid Concepts and Creative Analogies". Its the "Copycat" cognitive model:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copycat_%28software%29http://cogsci.indiana.edu/book.htmlhttps://people.cs.kuleuven.be/~joaquin.vanschoren/zsp/fluidconcepts/Its behaviour is very interesting to watch. It looks very natural as it works its way through a seemingly simple analogy problem.
There was a java implementation of this model, but it was taken down. It is mirrored here:
https://archive.org/details/JavaCopycatThen there is this guy in the same research group:
http://www.foundalis.com/res/diss_research.htmlHe got so frightened by his own puzzle solving program that he took it down, and now cries himself to sleep each night:
http://www.foundalis.com/soc/why_no_more_Bongard.htmlSo make of that what you will.
The model itself doesn't require knowledge of academic jargon to be understood or implemented in a computer program, and its an interesting excercise trying to apply it to other domains.