Abstract
Brooks has criticized traditional approaches
to artificial
intelligence as too ineffi-
cient. In particular, he has singled out techniques involving
search as
inadequate
to achieve the fast reaction times required by robots and other AI products
that
need to work in the real world. Instead he proposes
the subsumption architecture
as an overall organizing principle. This consists of
layers of behavioural modules,
each of which is capable of carrying out a complete (usually simple)
task. He has
employed
this architecture to build a series of simple mobile robots, but he claims
that it is appropriate
for all AI products. Brooks's proposal
is usually seen as an
example of nouvelle AI,
in contrast to good old-fashioned AI (GOFAI).
Automatic theorem proving
is the archetypal example of GOFAI. The resolution
theorem proving technique once served as the engine of AI. Of all areas of AI it
seems the most difficult to
implement using Brooks's ideas. It would thus serve
as a keen test of Brooks's proposal
to explore
to what extent the task of theorem
proving can be achieved by a subsumption architecture.
Tactics are programs
for guiding a theorem prover. They were introduced as
an efficient alternative to search-based techniques. In this paper
I compare recent
work on tactic-based theorem proving with Brooks's proposals and show that,
surprisingly,
there is a similarity between them. It thus seems that the distinction
between nouvelle AI and GOFAI is not so great as is sometimes claimed. However,
this exercise also identifies some criticisms of Brooks's proposal.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 71-85 |
Journal | Philosophical Transactions: Physical Sciences and Engineering |
Volume | 349 |
Issue number | 1689 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Oct 1994 |