Exclusively searching KB for all possible derivations on a given statement will lead to combinatorial explosion. What NARS does is to resolve conflicts whenever they are encountered by the system. That is, the system looks for better (more confident) conclusions until spent all the time allocated to the given task. In this process, if conflicting conclusions are found, a choice rule is applied to pick a winner.
Pei On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 10:55 AM, YKY (Yan King Yin) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 7/28/08, Pei Wang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Every "rule" is "general" to a degree, which means it ignores >> exception. It is simply impossible to list all exceptions for any >> given rule. This issue has been discussed by many people in the >> non-monotonic logic community. >> >> The solution is not to exclude exceptions, but to give more confident >> conclusion higher priority whenever a conflicts happens. > > > Thanks Pei, I think your solution is the most sensible so far. But > it depends on seaching the KB to find the proof with the highest > cumulative confidence -- in general this is unfeasible so sometimes we > may need to use less-confident short-cuts. But that's still > acceptable. > > YKY > > > ------------------------------------------- > agi > Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now > RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ > Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?&; > Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com > ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=108809214-a0d121 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
