David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Synthese 187 (S1):43-72 (2012)
As many philosophers agree, the frame problem is concerned with how an agent may efficiently filter out irrelevant information in the process of problem-solving. Hence, how to solve this problem hinges on how to properly handle semantic relevance in cognitive modeling, which is an area of cognitive science that deals with simulating human's cognitive processes in a computerized model. By "semantic relevance", we mean certain inferential relations among acquired beliefs which may facilitate information retrieval and practical reasoning under certain epistemic constraints, e. g., the insufficiency of knowledge, the limitation of time budget, etc. However, traditional approaches to relevance—as for example, relevance logic, the Bayesian approach, as well as Description Logic—have failed to do justice to the foregoing constraints, and in this sense, they are not proper tools for solving the frame problem/relevance problem. As we will argue in this paper, Non-Axiomatic Reasoning System (NARS) can handle the frame problem in a more proper manner, because the resulting solution seriously takes epistemic constraints on cognition as a fundamental theoretical principle
|Keywords||The frame problem Semantic relevance Confirmation paradox The Bayesian approach Description Logic Non-Axiomatic Reasoning System|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Sheldon J. Chow (2013). What's the Problem with the Frame Problem? Review of Philosophy and Psychology 4 (2):309-331.
Mark Sprevak (2005). The Frame Problem and the Treatment of Prediction. In L. Magnani & R. Dossena (eds.), Computing, Philosophy and Cognition. 4--349.
Kevin B. Korb (1998). The Frame Problem: An AI Fairy Tale. [REVIEW] Minds and Machines 8 (3):317-351.
Dan Sperber & Deirdre Wilson (1996). Fodor's Frame Problem and Relevance Theory (Reply to Chiappe & Kukla). Behavioral and Brain Sciences 19 (3):530-532.
Jarek Gryz (2013). The Frame Problem in Artificial Intelligence and Philosophy. Filozofia Nauki 2 (2):15-30.
Scott Hendricks (2006). The Frame Problem and Theories of Belief. Philosophical Studies 129 (2):317-33.
Zenon Pylyshyn (1996). The Frame Problem Blues. Once More, with Feeling. In K. M. Ford & Z. W. Pylyshyn (eds.), The Robot's Dilemma Revisited: The Frame Problem in Artificial Intelligence. Ablex.
Patrick Anselme & Robert M. French (1999). Interactively Converging on Context-Sensitive Representations: A Solution to the Frame Problem. Revue Internationale de Philosophie 53 (209):365-385.
Terry Horgan & Mark Timmons (2009). What Does the Frame Problem Tell Us About Moral Normativity? Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 12 (1):25 - 51.
L. Crockett (1994). The Turing Test and the Frame Problem: AI's Mistaken Understanding of Intelligence. Ablex.
Agustin Vicente (2002). How Dispositions Can Be Causally Relevant. Erkenntnis 56 (3):329-344.
David McFarland (1992). Animals as Cost-Based Robots. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 6 (2):133 – 153.
John L. Pollock (1997). Reasoning About Change and Persistence: A Solution to the Frame Problem. Noûs 31 (2):143-169.
Eric Lormand (1990). Framing the Frame Problem. Synthese 82 (3):353-74.
Joseph Agassi (1993). The Heuristic Bent. Philosophy and Rhetoric 26 (1):9 - 30.
Added to index2012-05-09
Total downloads16 ( #84,463 of 1,006,483 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,735 of 1,006,483 )
How can I increase my downloads?