Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!TUT.CIS.OHIO-STATE.EDU!goel-a
From: goel-a@TUT.CIS.OHIO-STATE.EDU (Ashok Goel)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.digest
Subject: Re: Newell's response to KL questions
Message-ID: <23016@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu>
Date: 30 Sep 88 04:06:59 GMT
Sender: daemon@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 26
Approved: ailist@ai.ai.mit.edu



I appreciate Professor Allen Newell's explanation of his scheme of
knowledge, symbolic, and device levels for describing the architecture
of intelligence. More recently, Prof. Newell has proposed a scheme
consisting of bands, specifically, the neural, cognitive, rational,
and social bands, for describing the architecture of the mind-brain.
Each band in this scheme can have several levels; for instance, the
cognitive band contains (among others) the deliberation and the
operation levels.  What is not clear (at least not to me) is the
relationship between the two schemes.  One possible relationship is
colinearity in that the device level corresponds to the neural band,
the symbolic level to the cognitive band, and the knowledge level to
the rational band. Another possibility is containment in the sense
that each of band consists of (the equivalents of) knowledge,
symbolic, and device levels. A yet another possibility is
orthogonality of one kind or another. Which relationship (if any)
between the two schemes does Prof. Newell imply?

A commonality between Newell's two schemes is their emphasis on
structure.  A different scheme, David Marr's, focuses on the
processing and functional aspects of cognition. Again, what (if any)
is the relationship between Newell's levels/bands and Marr's levels?
Colinearity, containment, or some kind of orthogonality?

--ashok--