So links can act as nodes, basically, as in a generalized hypergraph? That's also built into my system. The Link class is a subclass of the Node class. Nothing particularly difficult or unpleasant there.
A story can define a distinction between kinds in my system, but it would do so implicitly, through context, rather than explicitly through a formalized mechanism. While neither the links-as-nodes nor the story-as-concept is specifically used or accounted for in my design, it is easily extensible in both of these directions. What I'm looking for is a particular use case, a reason for paying special attention to this sort of functionality, as opposed to merely including the capability should it later be found to need that special attention. -- Sent from my Palm Pre On Oct 22, 2012 8:04 PM, Jim Bromer <[email protected]> wrote: A relatively concrete categorical definition of a concept might be a very short "story" denoting the distinction between two or more cases of a kind of thing. Although the distinction might be made briefer, that does not mean that it would be made better by such a device. Jim Bromer On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 8:57 PM, Jim Bromer <[email protected]> wrote: A concept may be defined by a word, a group of words, a sentence or a group of sentences (or even a fragment of a word). A category that such a concept might be said to belong to is also a concept. So the only distinction between a link (or an edge) and a node of a semantic network is relative to some purpose of relation or categorization (or description). Mike refuses to try to understand what I am saying because he would have to give up his sense of a superior point of view in order to understand it. Yes you have a more enlightened view point when it comes to trying to understand ideas that other people are trying to explain. But you resist 'understanding' what I am saying because it does not easily fall into an orderly point system that seems like it is immediately programmable. So you understand the words that I am using but I think you are simply refusing to understand the implications of those words because it is more unwieldy then your current beliefs. Jim Bromer On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 7:56 PM, Aaron Hosford <[email protected]> wrote: I would love to know where you're going with this. I can see you have an interesting insight. I don't think it's my faculties at fault, nor is it your communication skills. Communicating concepts at this level of abstraction is inherently difficult. I'm just looking for a clear, detailed explanation. I find it a little funny that you've grouped me in with Mike, considering he is nay-saying the possibility while I am busy building it, albeit not according to your liking, apparently. Also unlike Mike, I'm quite willing (eager!) to listen to other views. I recently said on this list that I like to learn about unfamiliar, orthogonal approaches because the more I learn about them, the more robust my design becomes. Maybe a few emails talking at a high level simply aren't enough for either of us to fully communicate our ideas. Obviously we've both put years into formulating our views, and to think that we can communicate the sum total of those insights in such a short time is pretty ambitious. I get the feeling you and I are mostly on the same page, unlike many of the others on this list, but that I haven't convinced you of it yet because I've told you precious little about the actual design of my system and I've made some simplifications for the purpose of clarity. I've considered phrases as variables already, and they are built into my system. However, "variable" is an oversimplificiation, because there is a degree of uncertainty involved in anaphora resolution. My system tracks multiple "values" for a "bound" phrase (think of a mathematical constant), keeping a certainty level for each. This means it can handle puns, not just single meanings. This is how non-quantifying pronouns and determiners are handled. On the other hand, quantifiers are going to be treated more like true variables, where an entire compound phrase or clause can match against objects and events recorded in the system's perceptual memory, or even other phrases or clauses, generating new information about the matched entities in the form of new phrases/clauses describing them. This part has not yet been implemented and is the next thing on my list. So what do you mean by using a sentence fragment as a category, if not this? Can you give a (relatively) concrete example? On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 4:45 PM, Jim Bromer <[email protected]> wrote: [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote As for recognizing a definite set of prepositions, you act as though I claimed the same preposition is treated the same way, regardless of context. If "in" means something different when talking about sets (containership, as in "it's in the box") than it does when talking about money (possession, as in "we're in the money") ------------------------ I said that word-concepts can be used in different ways in different contexts and you understood that. I also was saying that word-concepts, sentence fragments, sentences and collections of sentences and or sentence fragments can be used as categories or categorical definitions and you weren't sure about what I was saying. I said that while it is probably true that there are only a few words which are grammatical prepositions, there are uncountable numbers of sentences or sentence fragments from which relative positions might be inferred and you did not react to it. Finally I've been pointing out that a word-phrase or sentence fragments or sentences or concepts can be used as variable-like things and again you did not react to it - as if you are not ready to deal with the implications. I am not saying that you don't understand what I am saying only that you choose not to go there for some reason. You reacted to one thing that I have been saying but you don't seem to get the central things. You are not reacting to the same pieces of information that Mike Tintner is not reacting to. Jim Bromer AGI | Archives | Modify Your Subscription ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-c97d2393 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-2484a968 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
