Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!udel!brahms.udel.edu!gdtltr
From: gdtltr@brahms.udel.edu (gdtltr@limbo.org (The Befuddled One))
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Can we build computers that build Computers?
Message-ID: <22157@brahms.udel.edu>
Date: 17 Jun 91 03:36:33 GMT
References: <1991Jun16.214929.26509@newserve.cc.binghamton.edu>
Organization: Your Organization Could Be Here!
Lines: 42

In article <1991Jun16.214929.26509@newserve.cc.binghamton.edu> vu0208@bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu writes:
=>With so many much advance in computer architectures and AI, are we
=>heading to any progress towards the development of computer machines,
=>that in turn ON-THEIR-OWN design new computer architectures.
=>
=>This could be a PIPE-DREAM but if can achieve that in distant future
=>-then I guess we have created a new intelligent life. :}

   It seems to me that the main problem along these lines is describing
the problem and the desired goal. Ok, so we give a computer a program to
fit so many transistors into a certain space and let it design away. How
do you evaluate the performance of the newly designed machine, and for
what? It could certainly attempt to optimize for a benchmark, but it is
my understanding that benchmarks are more marketing tools than anything
else.
   However, even if we can come up with a "state-evaluation function" for
a processor, even for a restricted case, certainly it would take enormous
amounts of time to run the thing. It seems that human designers rely
heavily on philosophical grounds in deciding on which paths to take.
(obvious e.g. RISC vs. CISC) It might be possible to add "assumptions"
(where here I actually mean "biases") to the program to simplify things,
but I don't think that would produce much more than a very advanced CAD
system. I'm no AI expert (or necessarily an expert in anything,) but last
I checked, we didn't have creative AI systems yet.
   On the other hand, strictly in pipe-dream terms (:-), I don't see
why such a thing could not eventually be possible. Before we can expect
to have a fair, intelligent computer design computer, we will need
A) more advanced human-designed computers to run it on, and more
importantly, B) a better understanding of what exactly we are designing
and what we are designing it for.

                                        Gary Duzan
                                        Time  Lord
                                    Third Regeneration



-- 
                            gdtltr@brahms.udel.edu
   _o_                      ----------------------                        _o_
 [|o o|]                   To be is to be networked.                    [|o o|]
  |_o_|        Disclaimer: I have no idea what I am talking about.       |_o_|