I guess you're assuming extremely ambiguous english queries, and I'm assuming a good english query similar to my example. With a bad english query, you'll get bad results guaranteed. This is true for both humans trying to understand what you're saying, and for the poor computer trying to determine conceptual context. GIGO
For mathematical formulas and formal queries, the user would need to use formal notation.
Re:Command Lines: the next UI breakthrough?
by busy_beaver on Thursday May 10, 2007 @10:38AM
(#21047)
Err... what does doing math have to do with it? If I have a good (human) assistant, I can ask him or her to find me all the Y Combinator articles and it just works. I don't need to write some formal mathematical description of the task.
It's true that it's all math/physics/chemistry underneath, due to how the brain works, but in practice we never worry about that, just as an engineer doesn't generally consider quantum and relativistic effects when he's designing a bridge, or an outfielder doesn't scribble down a bunch of differential equations before catching a fly ball.
Sure, any standard computer is equivalent to a bounded Turing machine, but Turing machines are a real pain in the ass to program.
Mathematical purity is one thing. Getting your work done is quite another.
Over-mathematization is what killed AI (IMO).
There's nothing wrong with expressing a vague idea vaguely, but if you're definitely looking for definite information, you should use whatever method gets you exactly what you're after. If you chain together enough 90%-right assumptions, your probability of getting a wrong conclusion approaches 1.