On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 10:09 AM, Daniel Gross <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Linas, > > Thank you. > > What is the mechanism to endow new language elements in atomese with an > (custom) inference semantics. > What Ben said. Create your own inference engine by assembling out of the chainers. Create new language elements by defining new atom types. Give them any semantics you want. --linas > > thank you, > > Daniel > > > > > On Friday, 28 April 2017 17:47:16 UTC+3, linas wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 11:43 PM, Daniel Gross <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi Linas, >>> >>> Yes your intuition is right. >>> >>> Thank you for your clarification. >>> >>> What is the core meta-language that is OpenCog into which PLN can be >>> loaded. >>> >> >> Its the system of typed atoms and values values. >> http://wiki.opencog.org/w/Atom http://wiki.opencog.org/w/Value >> >> You can add new types if you wish (you can remove them too, but stuff >> will then likely break) with the new types defining teh new kinds of >> knowledge you want to represent. >> >> There is a rich set of pre-defined types, which encode pretty much >> everything that is generically useful, across multiple projects that people >> have done. We call this "language" "atomese" >> http://wiki.opencog.org/w/Atomese >> >> We've gone through a lot of different atom types, by trial and error; the >> current ones are the ones that seem to work OK. There are over a hundred >> of them. >> >> PLN uses only about a dozen of them, such as ImplicationLink, >> InheritanceLink, and most importantly, EvaluationLink. >> >> Using EvaluationLink is kind-of-like inventing a new type. So most users >> are told to use that, and nothing else. Some types seem to deserve a >> short-hand notation, and so these get hard-coded for various reasons >> (usually for performance reasons). >> >> --linas >> >>> >>> Daniel >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thursday, 27 April 2017 05:42:02 UTC+3, linas wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 9:13 PM, Daniel Gross <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Linas, >>>>> >>>>> I guess it would be good to differentiate between the KR architecture >>>>> and the language. Would be great if there exists some kind of comparison >>>>> of >>>>> the open cog language to other comparable KR languages. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I don't quite understand. However, if I were to take a guess at the >>>> intent. >>>> >>>> opencog allows you to design your own KR language; it doesn't much >>>> care, it provides a set of tools. These include a data store, a rule engine >>>> with backward and forward chainers, a pattern matcher, a pattern miner. >>>> >>>> Opencog does come with a default "KR language", PLN -- its described in >>>> multiple PLN books. But if you don't like PLN, you can create your own KR >>>> language. All the parts are there. >>>> >>>> The "cognitive architecture" is something you'd layer on top of the KR >>>> language (and/or on top of various neural nets, and/or on top of various >>>> learning algorithms, etc). >>>> >>>> opencog does not have a particularly firm "architecture" per se; we >>>> experiment and try to make things work, and learn from that. Ben would say >>>> that there is an architecture, it just hasn't been implemented yet. >>>> There's a lot to do, we're only getting started. >>>> >>>> --linas >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Then there are cognitive architectures, which can be compared. I think >>>>> Ben has a number of architectures compared in his book. >>>>> >>>>> i guess one then needs a kind of "composite" -- what an >>>>> architecture+language can do, since an architecture likely takes advantage >>>>> of the language features. >>>>> >>>>> Daniel >>>>> >>>>> On Wednesday, 26 April 2017 21:54:11 UTC+3, linas wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 1:41 PM, Nageen Naeem <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> OpenCog didn't shift to java from c++? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> You are welcome to study https://github.com/opencog for the source >>>>>> languages used. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Thanks for defining pros and cons if there is any paper on >>>>>>> comparison with other architecture kindly recommend me. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Ben has written multiple books on the archtiecture in general. The >>>>>> wiki describes particular choices. >>>>>> >>>>>> I am not aware of any other (knowledge-representation) architectures >>>>>> that can do what the atomspace can do. So I'm not sure what you want to >>>>>> compare against. Triplestore? various actionscripts? Prolog? >>>>>> >>>>>> --linas >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Wednesday, April 26, 2017 at 9:36:04 PM UTC+5, Ben Goertzel wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> OpenCog did not shift from Java to C++, it was always C++ >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The advantage of Atomspace is that it allows fine-grained semantic >>>>>>>> representations of all forms of knowledge in a common framework. >>>>>>>> The >>>>>>>> disadvantage is, this makes things complicated. The other >>>>>>>> advantage >>>>>>>> is, this fine-grained representation makes data amenable to >>>>>>>> multiple >>>>>>>> AI algorithms, including ones that can work together synergetically >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ben >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 12:10 PM, Nageen Naeem <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> > Hey, >>>>>>>> > I'm searching for pros and cons for using atomspace for knowledge >>>>>>>> > representation but didn't get any full-fledged answer related to >>>>>>>> it. what >>>>>>>> > are the pros and cons of using atomspace and why OpenCog shifted >>>>>>>> to java >>>>>>>> > from c++ what are reasons behind it? >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > -- >>>>>>>> > 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/bd2cd2ad-b15c-4a2e >>>>>>>> -a962-328a3197c0d7%40googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> Ben Goertzel, PhD >>>>>>>> http://goertzel.org >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "I am God! I am nothing, I'm play, I am freedom, I am life. I am >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> boundary, I am the peak." -- Alexander Scriabin >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> 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/d6da6287-a623-47eb >>>>>>> -b3c3-6444bce465c0%40googlegroups.com >>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/d6da6287-a623-47eb-b3c3-6444bce465c0%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>>>> . >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 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/CAHrUA374M8L0HP0JNgeCTS_PhEKiL4Lg%2B8RuJwS-H_0T9CjyMQ%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
