Talk:General Problem Solver
 | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
General Problem Solver (GPS) was a computer program created in 1957 by Herbert Simon and Allen Newell to prove theorems and play chess. Play chess? --Abdull 16:54, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- That would be a too strong claim, yes. —Ruud 17:08, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, this sounds better. While I have a clue what chess and geometric problems are, I don't understand what word problems are supposed to be. Bye, --Abdull 19:49, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- Me either. Plus a link to the articles on "word" and "geometric" hardly seem helpful here. Does anyone know the specifics on what problems the article is referring to? --Alexdow 23:45, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, this sounds better. While I have a clue what chess and geometric problems are, I don't understand what word problems are supposed to be. Bye, --Abdull 19:49, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
The aim og GPS is to be GENERAL problem solver machine. It can solve, in principle, any formalized problem. So theorem proof as well as play chess are all good problem for GPS.
Cfr. Expert system
Article too limited, actually kinda stupid[edit]
Taking a general term like "general problem solver" and attempting to define it in such a limited way, that it is represented by one attempt by one person or group is far too limited. It's like saying "car" is defined by the 1926 Ford Model T. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.231.137.223 (talk) 20:40, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
- That's what they called their program. It's just a historical fact. Meef4H (talk) 23:36, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
Lead sentence[edit]
"General Problem Solver (GPS) was a computer program created in 1957 by Herbert Simon, J.C. Shaw, and Allen Newell to build a universal problem solver machine" The opening sentence is either recursive or ungrammatical. Was GPS a computer program, or a project, i.e. a programme, that never really happened? The way it reads, it sounds like GPS was a computer program that could build a universal problem solver machine (i.e. on the face of it, itself).
The article also doesn't make it clear what degree of success the project/program had, since the goal as stated was certainly ambitious, and to my knowledge not yet achieved by any computer program. 122.26.120.146 (talk) 01:42, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
The Overview section is a jumbled mess[edit]
It's written so poorly it's borderline impossible to understand by a layperson. It needs to be fixed. Unfortunately, I don't know the subject well enough to understand the original article author's intent. ArtistPrime (talk) 22:07, 4 January 2024 (UTC)