On 04/28/2017 06:11 PM, Ben Goertzel wrote:
to implement new inference rules, you code new ImplicationLinks,
wrapped with LambdaLinks etc. ...
Some precision. You can encode rules as data using for instance
ImplicationLinks, then use PLN or any custom deduction, modus-ponens,
etc rules defined as BindLinks to reason on these. Or directly encode
your rules as BindLinks. The following example demonstrates the 2 ways
https://github.com/opencog/atomspace/tree/master/examples/rule-engine/frog
Nil
new inference rules coded as such Atoms, can be executed perfectly
well by the URE rule engine...
quantitative truth value formulas associated with new inference rules
can be coded in Scheme or python and wrapped in GroundedSchemaNodes
easy peasy...
On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 11:09 PM, 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.
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.
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/fe19fdfd-8070-40b2-a40a-82a9865aad84%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/fd399981-1d6c-237c-c1da-3fc3a34703e2%40gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
