McGreggor, Keith
An Experience Is a Knowledge Representation
McGreggor, Keith (Georgia Institute of Technology)
Computational agents use knowledge representations to reason about the data world they occupy. A theory of consciousness, Integrated Information Theory, suggests beings that are conscious use experiences to reason about the world they occupy. Herein, the question is considered: Is an experience a knowledge representation?
Confident Reasoning on Raven's Progressive Matrices Tests
McGreggor, Keith (Georgia Institute of Technology) | Goel, Ashok (Georgia Institute of Technology)
We report a novel approach to addressing the Raven’s Progressive Matrices (RPM) tests, one based upon purely visual representations. Our technique introduces the calculation of confidence in an answer and the automatic adjustment of level of resolution if that confidence is insufficient. We first describe the nature of the visual analogies found on the RPM. We then exhibit our algorithm and work through a detailed example. Finally, we present the performance of our algorithm on the four major variants of the RPM tests, illustrating the impact of confidence. This is the first such account of any computational model against the entirety of the Raven’s.
Fractally Finding the Odd One Out: An Analogical Strategy For Noticing Novelty
McGreggor, Keith (Georgia Institute of Technology) | Goel, Ashok (Georgia Institute of Technology)
The Odd One Out test of intelligence consists of 3x3 matrix reasoning problems organized in 20 levels of difficulty. Addressing problems on this test appears to require integration of multiple cognitive abilities usually associated with creativity, including visual encoding, similarity assessment, pattern detection, and analogical transfer. We describe a novel fractal strategy for addressing visual analogy problems on the Odd One Out test. In our strategy, the relationship between images is encoded fractally, capturing important aspects of similarity as well as inherent self-similarity. The strategy starts with fractal representations encoded at a high level of resolution, but, if that is not sufficient to resolve ambiguity, it automatically adjusts itself to the right level of resolution for addressing a given problem. Similarly, the strategy starts with searching for fractally-derived similarity between simpler relationships, but, if that is not sufficient to resolve ambiguity, it automatically shifts to search for such similarity between higher-order relationships. We present preliminary results and initial analysis from applying the fractal technique on nearly 3,000 problems from the Odd One Out test.
Two Visual Strategies for Solving the Raven’s Progressive Matrices Intelligence Test
Kunda, Maithilee (Georgia Institute of Technology) | McGreggor, Keith (Georgia Institute of Technology) | Goel, Ashok (Georgia Institute of Technology)
We present two visual algorithms, called the affine and fractal methods, which each solve a considerable portion of the Raven’s Progressive Matrices (RPM) test. The RPM is considered to be one of the premier psychometric measures of general intelligence. Current computational accounts of the RPM assume that visual test inputs are translated into propositional representations before further reasoning takes place. We propose that visual strategies can also solve RPM problems, in line with behavioral evidence showing that humans do use visual strategies to some extent on the RPM. Our two visual methods currently solve RPM problems at the level of typical 9- to 10-year-olds.
Reports of the AAAI 2010 Conference Workshops
Aha, David W. (Naval Research Laboratory) | Boddy, Mark (Adventium Labs) | Bulitko, Vadim (University of Alberta) | Garcez, Artur S. d'Avila (City University London) | Doshi, Prashant (University of Georgia) | Edelkamp, Stefan (TZI, Bremen University) | Geib, Christopher (University of Edinburgh) | Gmytrasiewicz, Piotr (University of Illinois, Chicago) | Goldman, Robert P. (Smart Information Flow Technologies) | Hitzler, Pascal (Wright State University) | Isbell, Charles (Georgia Institute of Technology) | Josyula, Darsana (University of Maryland, College Park) | Kaelbling, Leslie Pack (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) | Kersting, Kristian (University of Bonn) | Kunda, Maithilee (Georgia Institute of Technology) | Lamb, Luis C. (Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)) | Marthi, Bhaskara (Willow Garage) | McGreggor, Keith (Georgia Institute of Technology) | Nastase, Vivi (EML Research gGmbH) | Provan, Gregory (University College Cork) | Raja, Anita (University of North Carolina, Charlotte) | Ram, Ashwin (Georgia Institute of Technology) | Riedl, Mark (Georgia Institute of Technology) | Russell, Stuart (University of California, Berkeley) | Sabharwal, Ashish (Cornell University) | Smaus, Jan-Georg (University of Freiburg) | Sukthankar, Gita (University of Central Florida) | Tuyls, Karl (Maastricht University) | Meyden, Ron van der (University of New South Wales) | Halevy, Alon (Google, Inc.) | Mihalkova, Lilyana (University of Maryland) | Natarajan, Sriraam (University of Wisconsin)
The AAAI-10 Workshop program was held Sunday and Monday, July 11–12, 2010 at the Westin Peachtree Plaza in Atlanta, Georgia. The AAAI-10 workshop program included 13 workshops covering a wide range of topics in artificial intelligence. The titles of the workshops were AI and Fun, Bridging the Gap between Task and Motion Planning, Collaboratively-Built Knowledge Sources and Artificial Intelligence, Goal-Directed Autonomy, Intelligent Security, Interactive Decision Theory and Game Theory, Metacognition for Robust Social Systems, Model Checking and Artificial Intelligence, Neural-Symbolic Learning and Reasoning, Plan, Activity, and Intent Recognition, Statistical Relational AI, Visual Representations and Reasoning, and Abstraction, Reformulation, and Approximation. This article presents short summaries of those events.
Reports of the AAAI 2010 Conference Workshops
Aha, David W. (Naval Research Laboratory) | Boddy, Mark (Adventium Labs) | Bulitko, Vadim (University of Alberta) | Garcez, Artur S. d' (City University London) | Avila (University of Georgia) | Doshi, Prashant (TZI, Bremen University) | Edelkamp, Stefan (University of Edinburgh) | Geib, Christopher (University of Illinois, Chicago) | Gmytrasiewicz, Piotr (Smart Information Flow Technologies) | Goldman, Robert P. (Wright State University) | Hitzler, Pascal (Georgia Institute of Technology) | Isbell, Charles (University of Maryland, College Park) | Josyula, Darsana (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) | Kaelbling, Leslie Pack (University of Bonn) | Kersting, Kristian (Georgia Institute of Technology) | Kunda, Maithilee (Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)) | Lamb, Luis C. (Willow Garage) | Marthi, Bhaskara (Georgia Institute of Technology) | McGreggor, Keith (EML Research gGmbH) | Nastase, Vivi (University College Cork) | Provan, Gregory (University of North Carolina, Charlotte) | Raja, Anita (Georgia Institute of Technology) | Ram, Ashwin (Georgia Institute of Technology) | Riedl, Mark (University of California, Berkeley) | Russell, Stuart (Cornell University) | Sabharwal, Ashish (University of Freiburg) | Smaus, Jan-Georg (University of Central Florida) | Sukthankar, Gita (Maastricht University) | Tuyls, Karl (University of New South Wales) | Meyden, Ron van der (Google, Inc.) | Halevy, Alon (University of Maryland) | Mihalkova, Lilyana (University of Wisconsin) | Natarajan, Sriraam
The AAAI-10 Workshop program was held Sunday and Monday, July 11–12, 2010 at the Westin Peachtree Plaza in Atlanta, Georgia. The AAAI-10 workshop program included 13 workshops covering a wide range of topics in artificial intelligence. The titles of the workshops were AI and Fun, Bridging the Gap between Task and Motion Planning, Collaboratively-Built Knowledge Sources and Artificial Intelligence, Goal-Directed Autonomy, Intelligent Security, Interactive Decision Theory and Game Theory, Metacognition for Robust Social Systems, Model Checking and Artificial Intelligence, Neural-Symbolic Learning and Reasoning, Plan, Activity, and Intent Recognition, Statistical Relational AI, Visual Representations and Reasoning, and Abstraction, Reformulation, and Approximation. This article presents short summaries of those events.
Addressing the Raven’s Progressive Matrices Test of “General” Intelligence
Kunda, Maithilee (Georgia Institute of Technology) | McGreggor, Keith (Georgia Institute of Technology) | Goel, Ashok (Georgia Institute of Technology)
The Raven's Progressive Matrices (RPM) test is a commonly used test of general human intelligence. The RPM is somewhat unique as a general intelligence test in that it focuses on visual problem solving, and in particular, on visual similarity and analogy. We are developing a small set of methods for problem solving in the RPM which use propositional, imagistic, and multimodal representations, respectively, to investigate how different representations can contribute to visual problem solving and how the effects of their use might emerge in behavior.