I  updated the wiki page to mention it, and also mention that a BeliefLink
is the same as EvaluationLink Predicate "belief".   Not only would a port
into the current PLN infratructure be useful, but that should be followed
by a tutorial/example, and there should also be a hookup into the chatbot.
That would ... make for a fun demo.


On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Ben Goertzel <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hmm, OK, it's been a while since that work was done and almost as long
> since I looked at it
>
> The crux of Sumit's work was to modify the PLN truth value formulas to
> work sensibly for these modal-logic operators (belief, etc.).  That
> part was solid and I remember it.  But the choice of link types he
> used, I don't remember well and would need to revisit... probably
> you're right that it needs revisiting...
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Linas Vepstas <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > I just skimmed that code, and it does not seem to make use of the KR
> > structures described in http://wiki.opencog.org/w/Claims_and_context
> and
> > instead invents new link types .. e.g. BeliefLink.  This leads to a
> > proliferation: you'd need BeliefLink, SayLink,
> > TellLink,UseToBeleiveInThePastLink, LieLink etc.  So its not just a
> port,
> > but a fairly serious restructuring.
> >
> > --linas
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 11:14 AM, Ben Goertzel <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Code and theory for extending PLN to handle modal reasoning regarding
> >> beliefs, knowledge and so forth is here:
> >>
> >>
> >> https://github.com/sumitsourabh/opencog/tree/
> patch-1/opencog/reasoning/pln/rules/epistemic-reasoning
> >>
> >> This was carefully worked out by Sumit Sourabh and Matt Ikle' a few
> years
> >> ago.
> >>
> >> The code needs to be merged into the current version of PLN.   This
> >> would be a useful thing for someone to do, and then write associated
> >> unit tests.
> >>
> >> -- Ben
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 11:07 AM, Linas Vepstas <[email protected]
> >
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 10:25 PM, Alex <[email protected]>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Hi!
> >> >>
> >> >> There can be modalities (which are usually expressed as diamonds or
> >> >> boxes
> >> >> (operators) in modal logic):
> >> >> DUTY_TO_PERFORM_ACTION(agent, action, time horizone) - agent should
> >> >> perform action within time horizon
> >> >> BELIEF(agent, statement, time instant) - agent believes in statement
> at
> >> >> the time instant
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Wasn't this discussed in some other thread, just recently?
> >> > EvaluationLinks are the standard way of representing knowledge in
> >> > opencog.
> >> > See wiki for that.
> >> >
> >> > Also see wiki about how to represent beleifs .. there is some section
> >> > there
> >> > that discuses this, I don't recall where, or what it said.
> >> >
> >> > We've had prior discussions on the mailing list about representing
> >> > beleifs;
> >> > but we only had a minimal discussion about reasoning over them.  This
> is
> >> > one
> >> > area that should be clearified, and if new PLN rules are needed to
> >> > handle
> >> > this, then now is a good time to figure that out.
> >> >
> >> > --linas
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Such modalities are important in robotics (e.g. AGI safety - what
> >> >> duties
> >> >> and permissions robots have) and in communication (modelling other
> >> >> agent
> >> >> believes, knowledge and reasoning styles).
> >> >>
> >> >> Important point is, that by introducing modalities we also introduce
> >> >> additional axioms/meta-rules that connect modal statements
> (statements
> >> >> under
> >> >> modal operator) with the nonmodal statements and with the statements
> of
> >> >> other modalities (modal conversion). Example list of such metarules
> are
> >> >> available in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_logic. Such
> metarules
> >> >> sometimes are debatable, e.g. rule in deontic logic:
> >> >> DUTY_TO_PERORM_ACTION(agent,
> >> >> action)->PERMISSION_TO_PERFORM_ACTION(agent,
> >> >> action) and such metarules sometimes lead to paradoxes (classical
> >> >> deontic
> >> >> logic is full of them), nevertheless, such metarules expresses
> >> >> additional
> >> >> knowledge about reality. And such metarules can be mined and used for
> >> >> constraining inference process (inference control)!
> >> >>
> >> >> I have two questions regarding expression of modalities in OpenCog?:
> >> >> 1) how we can express modalities in Scheme/atomspace?
> >> >> -- One solution is to introduce new link types. Is such introduction
> >> >> possible? Maybe OpenCog have GenericLink for which the user form
> >> >> derivation
> >> >> and for the derivation the user can define syntax (how many Nodes and
> >> >> of
> >> >> what Type are allowed in the new Link) and semantics (what processes
> >> >> are
> >> >> done, what is output and strenght values of the output)? I have not
> >> >> heard
> >> >> about such option;
> >> >> -- Another solution is to use PredicateNode, e.g. belief can be
> >> >> expressed:
> >> >>    PredicateNode "agent_believe"
> >> >>       ConceptNode "Erving"
> >> >>       ConceptNode "Door is open"
> >> >> The question is - can be use other Node, Link, result of
> >> >> SatisfyingSetLink
> >> >> etc. in place of the literal "agent_believes"? Or we are bounded for
> >> >> using
> >> >> literal constants in the PredicateNode? If former is true, then the
> >> >> system
> >> >> is open for the arbitrary set of modalities and the system can
> generate
> >> >> new
> >> >> modalities!
> >> >>
> >> >> 2) how we can express metarules for modalities in OpenCog?:
> >> >> My proposal is to use rules that accepts some patterns of predicates
> >> >> and
> >> >> that generates new predicates:
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> rule_body(obligation_predicate_type_nodes)->rule_
> head(new_permission_predicate_type_nodes)
> >> >> Again - the question is about flexibility of the system: is the
> system
> >> >> allows generation of new link types or new predicate then the system
> >> >> can
> >> >> mine/generate the relevant rules for the newly generate modalities!
> >> >>
> >> >> Of course, I am studying literature, experimenting, thinking about
> >> >> this,
> >> >> but maybe someone also has thought about those questions and has
> >> >> already
> >> >> something done - it would be nice to hear thoughts, proposals and
> >> >> experience!
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks!
> >> >>
> >> >> --
> >> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> >> >> Groups
> >> >> "opencog" group.
> >> >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
> send
> >> >> an
> >> >> email to [email protected].
> >> >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> >> >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
> >> >> To view this discussion on the web visit
> >> >>
> >> >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/f70e8da1-1147-
> 41e9-8aa6-c2acbab14ce6%40googlegroups.com.
> >> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> >> > Groups
> >> > "opencog" group.
> >> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> >> > an
> >> > email to [email protected].
> >> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> >> > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
> >> > To view this discussion on the web visit
> >> >
> >> > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAHrUA36r01Q%
> 3DKbXsJE3%2BS2KbpfQ3oZ5WD%2B-XY_dfPP6PCPhdEw%40mail.gmail.com.
> >> >
> >> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Ben Goertzel, PhD
> >> http://goertzel.org
> >>
> >> “Our first mothers and fathers … were endowed with intelligence; they
> >> saw and instantly they could see far … they succeeded in knowing all
> >> that there is in the world. When they looked, instantly they saw all
> >> around them, and they contemplated in turn the arch of heaven and the
> >> round face of the earth. … Great was their wisdom …. They were able to
> >> know all....
> >>
> >> But the Creator and the Maker did not hear this with pleasure. … ‘Are
> >> they not by nature simple creatures of our making? Must they also be
> >> gods? … What if they do not reproduce and multiply?’
> >>
> >> Then the Heart of Heaven blew mist into their eyes, which clouded
> >> their sight as when a mirror is breathed upon. Their eyes were covered
> >> and they could see only what was close, only that was clear to them.”
> >>
> >> — Popol Vuh (holy book of the ancient Mayas)
> >>
> >> --
> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups
> >> "opencog" group.
> >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
> an
> >> email to [email protected].
> >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
> >> To view this discussion on the web visit
> >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CACYTDBdLatMo%
> 2BSErmaU6g2An1YfiqmNcPBN_ru-MNcFwxxY6Eg%40mail.gmail.com.
> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
> >
> >
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "opencog" group.
> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> > email to [email protected].
> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
> > To view this discussion on the web visit
> > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAHrUA34BEp9WsoTMMw44nT-%3DCv%
> 2BQE1i9%3D2bRg-NvSmEsekzy1g%40mail.gmail.com.
> >
> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
>
> --
> Ben Goertzel, PhD
> http://goertzel.org
>
> “Our first mothers and fathers … were endowed with intelligence; they
> saw and instantly they could see far … they succeeded in knowing all
> that there is in the world. When they looked, instantly they saw all
> around them, and they contemplated in turn the arch of heaven and the
> round face of the earth. … Great was their wisdom …. They were able to
> know all....
>
> But the Creator and the Maker did not hear this with pleasure. … ‘Are
> they not by nature simple creatures of our making? Must they also be
> gods? … What if they do not reproduce and multiply?’
>
> Then the Heart of Heaven blew mist into their eyes, which clouded
> their sight as when a mirror is breathed upon. Their eyes were covered
> and they could see only what was close, only that was clear to them.”
>
> — Popol Vuh (holy book of the ancient Mayas)
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "opencog" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [email protected].
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/
> msgid/opencog/CACYTDBevfrcxtXTr3XkPHL5P9OaG2Jnrc5-oKyJXJ8CBTn0i%2Bg%
> 40mail.gmail.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"opencog" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAHrUA35e5m6yo6iSXsYLEBaLB5NJOEb6b02%2B57XxLJbkZ3BweQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to