Cyc, the ambitious AI project started in 1984, aimed to codify common sense knowledge into a massive symbolic knowledge base, enabling truly intelligent machines. Despite decades of effort and millions of dollars invested, Cyc ultimately fell short of its grand vision. While it achieved some success in niche applications like semantic search and natural language understanding, its reliance on manual knowledge entry proved too costly and slow to scale to the vastness of human knowledge. Cyc's legacy is complex: a testament to both the immense difficulty of replicating human common sense reasoning and the valuable lessons learned about knowledge representation and the limitations of purely symbolic AI approaches.
This 1986 paper explores representing the complex British Nationality Act 1981 as a Prolog program. It demonstrates how Prolog's declarative nature and built-in inference mechanisms can effectively encode the Act's intricate rules regarding citizenship acquisition and loss. The authors translate legal definitions of British citizenship, descent, and residency into Prolog clauses, showcasing the potential of logic programming to represent and reason with legal statutes. While acknowledging the limitations of this initial attempt, such as simplifying certain aspects of the Act and handling time-dependent clauses, the paper highlights the potential of using Prolog for legal expert systems and automated legal reasoning. It ultimately serves as an early exploration of applying computational logic to the domain of law.
Hacker News users discussed the ingenuity of representing the British Nationality Act as a Prolog program, highlighting the elegance of Prolog for handling complex logic and legal rules. Some expressed nostalgia for the era's focus on symbolic AI and rule-based systems. Others debated the practicality and maintainability of such an approach for real-world legal applications, citing the potential difficulty of updating and debugging the code as laws change. The discussion also touched on the broader implications of encoding law in a computationally interpretable format, considering the benefits for automated legal reasoning and the potential risks of bias and misinterpretation. Some users shared their own experiences with Prolog and other logic programming languages, and pondered the reasons for their decline in popularity despite their inherent strengths for certain problem domains.
This Google Form poses a series of questions to William J. Rapaport regarding his views on the possibility of conscious AI. It probes his criteria for consciousness, asking him to clarify the necessary and sufficient conditions for a system to be considered conscious, and how he would test for them. The questions specifically explore his stance on computational theories of mind, the role of embodiment, and the relevance of subjective experience. Furthermore, it asks about his interpretation of specific thought experiments related to consciousness and AI, including the Chinese Room Argument, and solicits his opinions on the potential implications of creating conscious machines.
The Hacker News comments on the "Questions for William J. Rapaport" post are sparse and don't offer much substantive discussion. A couple of users express skepticism about the value or seriousness of the questionnaire, questioning its purpose and suggesting it might be a student project or even a prank. One commenter mentions Rapaport's work in cognitive science and AI, suggesting a potential connection to the topic of consciousness. However, there's no in-depth engagement with the questionnaire itself or Rapaport's potential responses. Overall, the comment section provides little insight beyond a general sense of skepticism.
This paper explores using first-order logic (FOL) to detect logical fallacies in natural language arguments. The authors propose a novel approach that translates natural language arguments into FOL representations, leveraging semantic role labeling and a defined set of predicates to capture argument structure. This structured representation allows for the application of automated theorem provers to evaluate the validity of the arguments, thus identifying potential fallacies. The research demonstrates improved performance compared to existing methods, particularly in identifying fallacies related to invalid argument structure, while acknowledging limitations in handling complex linguistic phenomena and the need for further refinement in the translation process. The proposed system provides a promising foundation for automated fallacy detection and contributes to the broader field of argument mining.
Hacker News users discussed the potential and limitations of using first-order logic (FOL) for fallacy detection as described in the linked paper. Some praised the approach for its rigor and potential to improve reasoning in AI, while also acknowledging the inherent difficulty of translating natural language to FOL perfectly. Others questioned the practical applicability, citing the complexity and ambiguity of natural language as major obstacles, and suggesting that statistical/probabilistic methods might be more robust. The difficulty of scoping the domain knowledge necessary for FOL translation was also brought up, with some pointing out the need for extensive, context-specific knowledge bases. Finally, several commenters highlighted the limitations of focusing solely on logical fallacies for detecting flawed reasoning, suggesting that other rhetorical tactics and nuances should also be considered.
The paper "PhD Knowledge Not Required: A Reasoning Challenge for Large Language Models" introduces "GSM8K," a dataset of 8.5K grade school math word problems designed to evaluate the reasoning and problem-solving abilities of large language models (LLMs). The authors argue that existing benchmarks often rely on specialized knowledge or easily-memorized patterns, while GSM8K focuses on compositional reasoning using basic arithmetic operations. They demonstrate that even the most advanced LLMs struggle with these seemingly simple problems, significantly underperforming human performance. This highlights the gap between current LLMs' ability to manipulate language and their true understanding of underlying concepts, suggesting future research directions focused on improving reasoning and problem-solving capabilities.
HN users generally found the paper's reasoning challenge interesting, but questioned its practicality and real-world relevance. Some pointed out that the challenge focuses on a niche area of knowledge (PhD-level scientific literature), while others doubted its ability to truly test reasoning beyond pattern matching. A few commenters discussed the potential for LLMs to assist with literature review and synthesis, but skepticism remained about whether these models could genuinely understand and contribute to scientific discourse at a high level. The core issue raised was whether solving contrived challenges translates to real-world problem-solving abilities, with several commenters suggesting that the focus should be on more practical applications of LLMs.
Summary of Comments ( 202 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43625474
Hacker News users discuss the apparent demise of Cyc, a long-running project aiming to build a comprehensive common sense knowledge base. Several commenters express skepticism about Cyc's approach, arguing that its symbolic, hand-coded knowledge representation was fundamentally flawed and couldn't scale to the complexity of real-world knowledge. Some recall past interactions with Cyc, highlighting its limitations and the difficulty of integrating it with other systems. Others lament the lost potential, acknowledging the ambitious nature of the project and the valuable lessons learned, even in its apparent failure. A few offer alternative approaches to achieving common sense AI, including focusing on embodied cognition and leveraging large language models, suggesting that Cyc's symbolic approach was ultimately too brittle. The overall sentiment is one of informed pessimism, acknowledging the challenges inherent in creating true AI.
The Hacker News post titled "Obituary for Cyc" sparked a lively discussion with a variety of perspectives on the project's history, ambitions, and ultimate fate. Several commenters offered firsthand accounts or insights gleaned from their proximity to Cyc.
One compelling thread explored the tension between Cyc's pursuit of common sense reasoning and the emergent capabilities of large language models (LLMs). Some argued that LLMs, despite their statistical nature, effectively demonstrate a form of "emergent" common sense, questioning the need for Cyc's meticulously handcrafted knowledge base. Others countered that LLMs lack true understanding and are prone to errors, highlighting Cyc's potential to provide a more robust and reliable foundation for AI. This discussion touched upon the philosophical differences between symbolic AI, as exemplified by Cyc, and the connectionist approach of LLMs.
Another key theme revolved around Cyc's practical applications and its perceived lack of widespread impact. Several commenters questioned the commercial viability of Cyc and speculated on the reasons behind its relative obscurity. Some attributed this to the project's ambitious scope and the inherent difficulty of encoding common sense. Others pointed to management decisions or the challenges of integrating Cyc's technology into existing systems.
Several commenters shared anecdotes about their interactions with Cyc and its creators, offering glimpses into the project's culture and internal workings. These personal accounts provided a more nuanced picture of the challenges and triumphs faced by the Cyc team.
Some comments delved into the technical details of Cyc's architecture and knowledge representation, highlighting its unique approach to symbolic AI. These discussions offered insights into the complexities of building a system capable of representing and reasoning about common sense knowledge.
A few commenters expressed a degree of cautious optimism about Cyc's future, suggesting that its vast knowledge base could still hold value in specific applications or as a complement to other AI approaches. However, the overall sentiment seemed to be one of respectful acknowledgment of Cyc's historical significance, tinged with a sense of disappointment at its unfulfilled potential. The discussion reflected a broader debate within the AI community about the best path toward achieving artificial general intelligence.