Liste des Groupes | Revenir à s logic |
Hi,
Lets say one milestone in cognitive science,
is the concept of "bounded rationality".
It seems LLMs have some traits that are also
found in humans. For example the anchoring effect
is a psychological phenomenon in which an
individual’s judgements or decisions
are influenced by a reference point or “anchor”
which can be completely irrelevant. Like for example
when discussing Curry Howard isomorphism with
a real world philosopher , one that might
not know Curry Howard isomorphism but
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring_effect
nevertheless be tempted to hallucinate some nonsense.
One highly cited paper in this respect is Tversky &
Kahneman 1974. R.I.P. Daniel Kahneman,
March 27, 2024. The paper is still cited today:
Artificial Intelligence and Cognitive Biases: A Viewpoint
https://www.cairn.info/revue-journal-of-innovation-economics-2024-2-page-223.htm Maybe using deeper and/or more careful reasoning,
possibly backed up by Prolog engine, could have
a positive effect? Its very difficult also for a
Prolog engine, since there is a trade-off
between producing no answer at all if the software
agent is too careful, and of producing a wealth
of nonsense otherwise.
Bye
Mild Shock schrieb:
>
> Well we all know about this rule:
>
> - Never ask a woman about her weight
>
> - Never ask a woman about her age
>
> There is a similar rule for philosophers:
>
> - Never ask a philosopher what is cognitive science
>
> - Never ask a philosopher what is formula-as-types
>
> Explanation: They like to be the champions of
> pure form like in this paper below, so they
> don’t like other disciplines dealing with pure
> form or even having pure form on the computer.
>
> "Pure” logic, ontology, and phenomenology
> David Woodruff Smith - Revue internationale de philosophie 2003/2
> https://www.cairn.info/revue-internationale-de-philosophie-2003-2-page-21.htm >
Mild Shock schrieb:There are more and more papers of this sort:
>
Reliable Reasoning Beyond Natural Language
To address this, we propose a neurosymbolic
approach that prompts LLMs to extract and encode
all relevant information from a problem statement as
logical code statements, and then use a logic programming
language (Prolog) to conduct the iterative computations of
explicit deductive reasoning.
[2407.11373] Reliable Reasoning Beyond Natural Language
>
The future of Prolog is bright?
>
Mild Shock schrieb:Could be a wake-up call this many participants>
already in the commitee, that the whole logic
world was asleep for many years:
>
Non-Classical Logics. Theory and Applications XI,
5-8 September 2024, Lodz (Poland)
https://easychair.org/cfp/NCL24
>
Why is Minimal Logic at the core of many things?
Because it is the logic of Curry-Howard isomoprhism
for symple types:
>
----------------
Γ ∪ { A } ⊢ A
>
Γ ∪ { A } ⊢ B
----------------
Γ ⊢ A → B
>
Γ ⊢ A → B Δ ⊢ A
----------------------------
Γ ∪ Δ ⊢ B
>
And funny things can happen, especially when people
hallucinate duality or think symmetry is given, for
example in newer inventions such as λμ-calculus,
>
but then omg ~~p => p is nevertheless not provable,
because they forgot an inference rule. LoL
>
Recommended reading so far:
>
Propositional Logics Related to Heyting’s and Johansson’s
February 2008 - Krister Segerberg
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228036664
>
The Logic of Church and Curry
Jonathan P. Seldin - 2009
https://www.sciencedirect.com/handbook/handbook-of-the-history-of-logic/vol/5/suppl/C >
>
Meanwhile I am going back to my tinkering with my
Prolog system, which even provides a more primitive
logic than minimal logic, pure Prolog is minimal
>
logic without embedded implication.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.