>  Maybe it would be easy
> to rip out Cyc's upper ontology, and replace it by SUMO's,
> or v.v. I don't know ... I suspect its not, and that bothers
> me; that is a bit an important problem.
>


It would *not* be easy to do so, and this is a significant problem...

IMO, the whole approach of building explicit knowledge-bases
like Cyc and SUMO is a dead-end.

It may well be useful for creating useful, limited-functionality
narrow-AI products of various sorts.  But I'm not even confident
of this, because a lot of work has been put into this direction,
with very poor results.  I'm more bullish on the creation of
knowledge-bases by mining natural language.

I would bet that merging two KB's obtained by mining natural
language would work a lot better than merging two KB's
like Cyc and SUMO that were artificially created by humans.

The problem seems to be that we don't, explicitly and declaratively,
know how our internal, intuitive knowledge bases are structured.

-- Ben

-----
This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email
To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to:
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=63801259-bf9a05

Reply via email to