Steve said, Beneath a lot of words I have made a really simple statement - that for a computer to grok the semantics of what was said, it must do SOME sort of pattern matching, be it with triggered rules as I have outlined, or in a database as Roland has outlined. Triggered rules have NO complexity restraints, whereas databases are restrained by the limits of their indexing systems.
Can you explain this to me? Triggered rules do the pattern matching in your model? What does that mean? How does that work? Jim Bromer On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 5:35 PM, Steve Richfield <[email protected]>wrote: > PM, > > Here's the challenge: > > Everyone has a theory of NL, including me, which I outlined in the patent > application. My theory, which involves the interchangeable placement of > locating and payload words, is MUCH more directly programmable than other > theories I have seen, and further, is consistent with the human ability to > without difficulty understand fractured statements. Hence, before digging > too deeply into new theories, I tend to first look at their advantages > relative to my own theory. > > We should be discussing things, not throwing books and papers back and > forth, especially in our fast moving world where right now in the spring, > publication deadlines are passing almost on a daily basis. > > Beneath a lot of words I have made a really simple statement - that for a > computer to grok the semantics of what was said, it must do SOME sort of > pattern matching, be it with triggered rules as I have outlined, or in a > database as Roland has outlined. Triggered rules have NO complexity > restraints, whereas databases are restrained by the limits of their > indexing systems. > > Note that DrEliza.com is built in VB, which is a pretty thin wrapper on a > JET SQL database. IMHO with lots of experience, databases are TOO SLOW for > practical application. I got past some of the limitations in DrEliza.com by > having an initialization step that reads EVERYTHING in the DB. It sits > there for a full minute doing nothing, and then it is ready for action once > everything has been read into the DB cache. However, DrEliza.com is just a > small demo of a MUCH bigger future implementation, where this approach > wouldn't be practical. > > Looking for some way of picking apart various approaches, I saw that the > handling of idioms was key, because they are a problem for ALL approaches, > and further, they were SO common in everyday speech and writing. Hence, I > keep asking about idioms. > > This paper seems to be yet another paper about ontologies, but this > doesn't bear on my stated concerns - that everyday English (and other > languages) are only semi-grammatical in a way that short-circuits most > proposed parsing methods, with or without ontological analysis piled on top > of them. > > And, yes, I am also guilty of throwing books and papers at people, usually > when I don't have any good answers. Hence, I have learned to interpret this > action in others. > > So, either Roland is going to discuss this, or I will set his methods > aside for having the defects that they appear to have. > > Steve > ============== ------------------------------------------- AGI Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-f452e424 Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-58d57657 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
