This post is regarding the paper:
Five Basic Principles of Developmental Robotics, 2006,
posted Sep 2, 2008 10:30 AM by Brian Tanner [ updated Sep 2, 2008 10:48 AM ]
http://prw06.rl-community.org/posters/five-basic-principles-of-developmental-robotics by Alexander Stoytchev, Department of Computer Science, Iowa State University
Also in a 2009's IEEE edition, with extensions based on Stoychev's PhD thesis:
" ... Some Basic Principles of Developmental Robotics
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TAMD.2009.2029989Abstract: This paper formulates five basic principles of developmental robotics. These principles are formulated based on some of the recurring themes in the developmental learning literature and in the author's own research. The five principles follow logically from the verification principle (postulated by Richard Sutton) which is assumed to be self-evident. This paper also gives an example of how these principles can be applied to the problem of autonomous tool use in robot "
Yet another academic paper that I found recently, which is published years after the works of mine and is based on a bunch of other works, and in the academic eyes those are "new contributions".
Sure, they are novel - in the community to which they are presented and their subculture, and in the specific way they are presented.
Not that I claim plagiarism or something, the case is rather "great minds think alike" ;)), I recommend the paper.
The differences are in the social position and status, background, resources, support - $$$, peers, access to literature and conferences, - and experience needed to made those claims.
Those seem significantly in my favor, as a poor teenager in high school... :))
Of course it doesn't sound plausible that an institutionalized researcher, who's well fit into the mainstream system to go read "crank's" works on the Internet - "who are they" - if a paper was not published in a conference or a journal (costs $$$ to go to a conference etc.), it's like it didn't exist. I discovered this back as a freshman... That particular paper is grounded on other papers from the "system", including author's own. Also who's gonna read "crank's" (high-school students') works published in Bulgarian - non-Bulgarians are highly unlikely to have ever known of my existence up to later years.
Well, in this particular case, though, there's a chance that the author of that paper has known about my works anyway, because he's a fellow Bulgarian, and there was a forum where a few of us, "the cranks" and other enthusiasts gathered for a while in 2004 - the forum of the so called "Project Kibertron" for a generally intelligent humanoid robot
Let's get to the point:
Autonmous Mental Development
I found this in the "subculture" called "Autonmous Mental Development (AMD) - or Developmental Robotics (certainly the more popular term). That reminded me of those "split brain" academia, there exist subcultures, groups, which don't know each other good enough and may produce similar results, or results which are of help to the others. For example... Well - later about that. ;P
- The Veriﬁcation Principle (credited Sutton 2001)
- The Principle of Embodiment
- The Principle of Subjectivity
- The Principle of Grounding
- The Principle of Gradual Exploration
Some translations of a part of my classical works
Other not translated:
If I am to state the precise points and matches, I'd write a more formal paper later, but let me give just a few short examples:
For example, the Sutton's "verification principle" and all the rest are obvious for a sensori-motor generalizing self-improving system, one of the explicit statements in my works is the "match", the way "truth" is defined and found. (I'm "late" to Sutton here, but I haven't heard of him, as that community haven't heard of me.)
From Universe and Mind 3 (2003), Universe and Mind 4 (2004):
50. The truth is a match – if the knowledge (or
confidence, belief, persuasion [, desire])
matches something that is perceived somewhere
else later, then the new one is true, compared to
the old one; on the other hand, if the new one is
different, it's “a lie” (false) or it becomes truth
and the old truth turns into full or partial false,
depending on how the new truth is different
from the old one. The more the newly evaluated
for “truth” input piece of knowledge [pattern]
matches a piece of knowledge [pattern] from the
memories of mind, the more it's “truth” and
“actual”, according to mind. Therefore,
determining a “truth” is a determination of
difference between past and wanted present.
(“Wanted” was missing in the Part 3 writing,
added here in Part 4).
[“Truth” in Bulgarian is “Istina” (истина)]
Interestingly, in Serbian “isto” means “same” -
it has morphological association to “same”,
because the statement that a given feature is
“truth” means also that:
TRUTH: The feature [specifics, detail] that is
being evaluated matches the pattern/template - it
is the same as in the pattern, at a given
resolution of perception. (*That's a definition of
Stoychev mentions the philosophy school of the logical neopositivists as an origin of the "verification" principle. My opponent and co-author of my 2002 epistolary work "Theory of Universal Predetermination II"* (Universe and Mind, Part 2) - Angel Grancharov - who was a professional philosopher having also University level teaching experience and an author of many books, was "insulting me" for being a "positivist" and explaining me how "flawed" that philosophy is, and that it's not really a philosophy. I didn't know that there's such a school, I heard about that school for the first time in those emails.
The quote above is about the subjectivity, embodiment, grounding and gradual exploration, all in one sentence: "...The more the newly evaluated for “truth” input piece of knowledge [pattern] matches a piece of knowledge [pattern] from the memories of mind, the more it's “truth” and “actual”, according to mind", "at a given resolution of perception".
"Grounding" is related also to the notion of "reality" as the "lowest level of virtual universe", and statements that for any system there's one lowest level, from where generalization starts.
...The series will continue with a few explicit marks/comparisons of the matches between my classical works to Jeff Hawkins's "On Intelligence" and the HTM, which are published after mine.
See also: http://artificial-mind.blogspot.com/2012/12/compression-and-beauty-matches-between.html