更改

Most mainstream AI researchers hope that strong AI can be developed by combining the programs that solve various sub-problems. Hans Moravec wrote in 1988: <blockquote>"I am confident that this bottom-up route to artificial intelligence will one day meet the traditional top-down route more than half way, ready to provide the real world competence and the commonsense knowledge that has been so frustratingly elusive in reasoning programs. Fully intelligent machines will result when the metaphorical golden spike is driven uniting the two efforts."</blockquote>

Most mainstream AI researchers hope that strong AI can be developed by combining the programs that solve various sub-problems. Hans Moravec wrote in 1988: <blockquote>"I am confident that this bottom-up route to artificial intelligence will one day meet the traditional top-down route more than half way, ready to provide the real world competence and the commonsense knowledge that has been so frustratingly elusive in reasoning programs. Fully intelligent machines will result when the metaphorical golden spike is driven uniting the two efforts."</blockquote>

大多数主流人工智能研究人员希望，通过结合解决各种子问题的项目，可以开发出强人工智能。汉斯·莫拉维克(Hans Moravec)在1988年写道: “我相信，这种自下而上的人工智能路线，终有一天会与传统的自上而下的路线在后半程相遇。令人沮丧的是，当下，真实世界的能力和常识知识在推理程序中一直难以捉摸。而这两种路线结合的人工智能将能为我们解决这些疑难。当一个黄金钉一样的东西将二者结合起来时，就会产生完全智能的机器。” / blockquote

大多数主流人工智能研究人员希望，通过结合解决各种子问题的项目，可以开发出强人工智能。汉斯·莫拉维克(Hans Moravec)在1988年写道: “我相信，这种自下而上的人工智能路线，终有一天会与传统的自上而下的路线在后半程相遇。令人沮丧的是，当下，真实世界的能力和常识知识在推理程序中一直难以捉摸。而这两种路线结合的人工智能将能为我们解决这些疑难。当一个黄金钉一样的东西将二者结合起来时，就会产生完全智能的机器。”  

However, even this fundamental philosophy has been disputed; for example, Stevan Harnad of Princeton concluded his 1990 paper on the Symbol Grounding Hypothesis by stating: <blockquote>"The expectation has often been voiced that "top-down" (symbolic) approaches to modeling cognition will somehow meet "bottom-up" (sensory) approaches somewhere in between. If the grounding considerations in this paper are valid, then this expectation is hopelessly modular and there is really only one viable route from sense to symbols: from the ground up. A free-floating symbolic level like the software level of a computer will never be reached by this route (or vice versa) – nor is it clear why we should even try to reach such a level, since it looks as if getting there would just amount to uprooting our symbols from their intrinsic meanings (thereby merely reducing ourselves to the functional equivalent of a programmable computer)."</blockquote>

However, even this fundamental philosophy has been disputed; for example, Stevan Harnad of Princeton concluded his 1990 paper on the Symbol Grounding Hypothesis by stating: <blockquote>"The expectation has often been voiced that "top-down" (symbolic) approaches to modeling cognition will somehow meet "bottom-up" (sensory) approaches somewhere in between. If the grounding considerations in this paper are valid, then this expectation is hopelessly modular and there is really only one viable route from sense to symbols: from the ground up. A free-floating symbolic level like the software level of a computer will never be reached by this route (or vice versa) – nor is it clear why we should even try to reach such a level, since it looks as if getting there would just amount to uprooting our symbols from their intrinsic meanings (thereby merely reducing ourselves to the functional equivalent of a programmable computer)."</blockquote>

然而，连如此基本的哲学问题也存在争议; 例如，普林斯顿大学的斯蒂文·哈纳德(Stevan Harnad)在1990年关于'''<font color="#ff8000">符号基础假说(the Symbol Grounding Hypothesis)</font>'''的论文中总结道: “人们经常提出这样的期望，即建立“自上而下”(符号)的认知模型的方法将在某种程度上与“自下而上”(感官)的方法在建模过程中的某处相会。如果本文中的基本考虑是正确的，那么绝望的是，这种期望是模块化的，并且从认知到符号真的只有一条可行的路径: 从头开始。类似计算机软件级别的自由浮动的符号永远不可能通过这条路径实现，反之亦然——甚至也不清楚为什么我们应该尝试达到这样一个级别，因为它看起来就像是把我们的符号从它们的内在意义上连根拔起(从而仅仅把我们自己降低为可编程计算机的功能等价物)。” / blockquote

然而，连如此基本的哲学问题也存在争议; 例如，普林斯顿大学的斯蒂文·哈纳德(Stevan Harnad)在1990年关于'''<font color="#ff8000">符号基础假说(the Symbol Grounding Hypothesis)</font>'''的论文中总结道: “人们经常提出这样的期望，即建立“自上而下”(符号)的认知模型的方法将在某种程度上与“自下而上”(感官)的方法在建模过程中的某处相会。如果本文中的基本考虑是正确的，那么绝望的是，这种期望是模块化的，并且从认知到符号真的只有一条可行的路径: 从头开始。类似计算机软件级别的自由浮动的符号永远不可能通过这条路径实现，反之亦然——甚至也不清楚为什么我们应该尝试达到这样一个级别，因为它看起来就像是把我们的符号从它们的内在意义上连根拔起(从而仅仅把我们自己降低为可编程计算机的功能等价物)。”