Feel welcome: http://epia2011.appia.pt/
Well, congratulations for the topics and for those guys reforming, but the term is ridiculous. It's obviously coined by orthodox scientifical AI-niks, who're reforming, while keeping their scientific roots (means citations, publications in "high-impact journals" etc.).
I'd stick to the terms AGI and UAI, like in Bulgarian I prefer "УИР" (UIR - Universalen Izkustven Razum) which encompasses both, instead of "УИИ" (UII - "Intelekt"). One of the simple practical reasons is that "УИИ" (UII) sounds too close to "хуй" (HUY) ~ it means "D." English word starting with dic*.
Come on!... :)
From the site:
"The importance of Artificial Intelligence in Portugal is visible by the number of PhDs (over 100), the sheer number of researchers ..."
Good... I'm not saying this for the first time, like for example about the "MEXICA" "creative" framework.
Sorry, but what the h* are all these PhDs doing? Hundreds, thousands, 10s of thousands researchers are supposed to be working on "GAI" projects full-time. Thousands of human-months work. Results? Real things?
Real things and progress is actually coming from non-PhDs, such as formally electrical engineer and neuroscientist Jeff Hawkins, or mathematics and physics PhDs, such as M. Hutter, J.Schmidhuber and B. Goertzel.
This is not surprising - as another non-AI-PhD from the AGI community says, AI belongs (mostly) to "tinkerers" (his term). Check out too see more clearly what I mean:
- MEXICA: Creativity Disappointment
- B. Kazachenko: Intelligence by definition
This reminds me that recently I found a video lecture by one of the authors of the notorious "classics" in AI: "AI: A Modern Approach", surprisingly mainly on NLP, collocations and stuff, pretending to be new directions in AI or something...
Very smart, funny and high-status guy, obviously, but I have never had patience to give his book a try, I just knew it's "classics", partially because long time ago I started to distinguish myself from "AI", insisting that if all that junk is called "AI", the least thing one could do is to coin a non-polluted term and stay away.
Now I glanced the content of this "classics" and saw I've not mistaken not reading it... Sorry, but I didn't see anything "modern" in a 1000 pages of random high-level non-scaling really classical methods (except a few chapters on agents and machine learning).
Dear respectful high status scientists and directors - give us results, please. Pretentious pedantically written PhD theses and a large number of publications or citations are meaningful status-symbol per se mostly in the pretentious environment of the scientific conferences and non-specialists surrounding where the only mean for the others to recognize how big researcher you are is to count your publications and citations or how high you are in the science status - PhD student, PhD, Post-Doc, .... Check the links above to understand what's wrong with that.