查詢結果分析
來源資料
相關文獻
- 語意、葛德爾定理與類神經網路
- 行動電話產品造形與消費者感性關聯之建立
- 基於圖像之語意導向與細節保留的2D虛擬試穿網路
- 基於端對端模型化技術之語音文件摘要
- Neural Network Procedures for Taguchi's Dynamic Problems
- A Fast and Efficient Competitive Learning Design Algorithm Based on Weight Vector Training in Transform Domain
- 專家系統振動訊號圖型判別之研究
- A Study of Some COLOR Compound Words in English (Part 1)
- 反傳遞模糊類神經網路於流量推估之應用
- 類神經網路(Neural Networks)的種類及其在影像處理上的應用
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 語意、葛德爾定理與類神經網路=Semantics, Gödel's Theorem, and Neural Networks |
---|---|
作 者 | 洪裕宏; 洪裕宏; | 書刊名 | 歐美研究 |
卷 期 | 22:1 1992.03[民81.03] |
頁 次 | 頁43-74 |
分類號 | 312.2 |
關鍵詞 | 語意; 葛德爾定理; 類神經網路; 認知模釋; Semantics; Gödel's theorem; Neural networks; Cognitive modeling; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
英文摘要 | John Searle' Chinese Room Argument and Godel's Incompleteness Theorem has been taken as fatal attacks to the traditional digital computer models of the mind. The main thrust of Searle's argument is that a programmed computer is purely a syntactic machine which is not sufficient for modeling the semantic aspect of the mind. Godel's theorem has been taken, on the other hand, to show that a programmed computer is necessarily inferior to human mind for it in principle cannot "see" the truth of its Godel sentence while human beings can. Searle further proposes that an extended version of his argument, i.e., Chinese Gym Argument, shows the similar consequence for neural network models. Roger Penrose rejuvenates the argument from Godel's theorem and intends to show that human mind is non-algorithmic, hence no Turing Machine approach can succeed in modeling the mind. In this paper, I discuss the relations between neural network models and Searle's argument and Penrose's argument. I contend that Searle might be right in refuting digital computer models, but he totally misunderstands the nature of neural network models. His Chinese Gym Argument cannot be applied to neural networks. With regard to Penrose's argument, I argue that Godel's theorem does not have the philosophical implications with which he think can defeat Turing Machine models, not to mention neural network models. Although I don't agree with Penrose with respect to the above issue, he nevertheless is correct in pointing out that human mind might be non-algorithmic, and hence no algorithmic models can suffice in modeling the mind. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。