"Word Grammar" comes to my mind, where when A -R-> B, and A' is-a A,
then you know A' -R-> B' where B' is-a B. Because I want to have
lattices (partial orders)  in my system anyway, and because nodes of
my graph-terms might be objects of any domain (they can be nested
graph-terms even), they could usually be from the partial orders
domain and I could add subtyping semantics. So, inheritance relations
would be specified separately from graph-terms. So, you would write:

(<rdf:type> ?object-type ?X)
(is-a ?X <owl:Thing>)

where "is-a" is not part of the graph-term, it rather relates
graph-terms. Or you could look at it as a special edge, similarly to
"Word Grammar".

On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 4:17 AM, Stephen Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Lukasz,
>
> Here is a typical Capability Description from my first set of bootstrap
> cases:
>
>  (capability
>   name: "defineInstanceVariable"
>   description: "Defines an instance variable having the given name and
> object type."
>   preconditions:
>     (<rdf:type> ?variable-name <cyc:NonEmptyCharacterString>)
>     (<rdf:type> ?object-type <owl:Thing>)
>     (<rdf:type> ?variable-comment <cyc:NonEmptyCharacterString>)
>     (<rdf:type> ?variable-invariant-conditions <cyc:Tuple>)
>     (implies
>       (<cyc:memberOfTuple> ?variable-invariant-condition
> ?variable-invariant-conditions)
>       (<rdf:type> ?variable-invariant-condition <cyc:CycLFormula>))
>   input-roles:
>     (<texai:blRole> ?variable-name "a variable name")
>     (<texai:blRole> ?object-type "a type")
>     (<texai:blRole> ?variable-comment "a comment")
>     (<texai:blRole> ?variable-invariant-conditions "some invariant
> conditions")
>   output-roles:
>     (<texai:blRole> ?defined-instance-variable "the defined instance
> variable")
>   postconditions:  ;;TODO properties of the output with regard to the inputs
>     (<rdf:type> ?defined-instance-variable
> <texai:org.texai.bl.domainEntity.BLInstanceVariable>)
> )
>
> I think that the restriction you propose is not expressive enough to handle
> this case.  If I am wrong please correct me.  The matching is performed on
> the preconditions, postconditions and invariant-conditions.  The latter is
> not illustrated in this example but consist of implications similar in form
> to the one found in the preconditions of this example.
>
> For the others on this list following my progress, the example is from a set
> of essential capability descriptions that I'll use to bootstrap the skill
> acquisition facility of the the Texai dialog system.   The subsumption-based
> capability matcher is done.  I'm writing Java code that implements each of
> these capabilities.  That should be completed in a few more days, and then
> I'll fit that into the already completed dialog system.  At that point I
> should be able to begin exploring what essential utterances will be needed
> to acquire skills by being taught, and generate Java programs to perform
> them.
>
> -Steve
>

-------------------------------------------
agi
Archives: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: http://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/
Modify Your Subscription: 
http://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=103754539-40ed26
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

Reply via email to