Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!ucsd!sdcc6!mangani!velasco From: velasco@mangani.ucsd.edu (Gabriel Velasco) Newsgroups: comp.ai Subject: Re: AI genealogy Keywords: genealogy Message-ID: Date: 12 Mar 91 18:44:05 GMT References: <2571@enuxha.eas.asu.edu> Sender: news@sdcc6.ucsd.edu Lines: 75 coven@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (H. Justin Coven) writes: > Your genealogy process is rather obnoxious. It appears as if you are basing >credibility of AI work on proper parentage. We are not really dealing with credibility. We are simply looking for correlations. Eventually we hope this will also be a tool for people doing research. The idea is that there should be one central database of what type of AI research has already been done so that nobody tries to reinvent the wheel. We will design the system to do more sophisticated searches than the normal key word search that is usually done. This would also be a valuable tool for people who want to make sure that they will not be suspected of plagiarism. >It insults a great number of >individuals. I think I've already addressed this by stating that we just needed a good starting point. We know that valuabel research is being done in places other than colleges. One problem with trying to determine what kind of research is going on in governent, for example, is that much of it is classified. Theses are an easy thing to check because they must be made public. There is no problem here with invasion of privacy or security. >I certainly hope there are many who have ideas from places >other than their advisors, otherwise we are a rather slow witted bunch. We think that it is an evolutionary process. These ideas from the non-slow-witted may take the form of mutations of the ideas from their advisors. I think that your advisor hopes that s/he has had or will have a positive influence in your education. I also think that your advisor would like you to go beyond what s/he has done, but I'll bet you use a lot of the same words. If for no other reason than the convenience of being able to talk to each other without confusion. >I believe your interest in words used by different groups is but a >guise to hide behind, What are we hiding from? On the net there has been flak, but I have received lots of responses; many with good comments attached. >otherwise you would be looking more in depth in >subfields of linguistics. I'm not sure what you mean here. We will be using linguistics techniques to analyse the data. It is primarily an information retrieval exercise. AI deals with linguistics, so that is bound to show up in the database. >Likewise trying to clothe "genealogy" as >history of science is also a guise. I don't think we're trying to disguise anything. We're just looking at a problem that seems interesting to us. It seems like this type of database will have practical applications. >Determing how succesful ideas are passed on is rather subjective. Maybe this can help us add some objectivity to the task. >[some interesting issues deleted] >As you can see your >original genealogy question touches upon many subjective and >controversial points. That's what makes it interesting and important. Are you saying that we should not do research because it's controversial? -- ________________________________________________ <>___, / / | ... and he called out and said, "Gabriel, give | /___/ __ / _ __ ' _ / | this man an understanding of the vision." | /\__/\(_/\/__)\/ (_/_(/_/|_ |_______________________________________Dan_8:16_|