This is straightforward: Strength is a measure of likelihood — it can be thought of as a probability, while confidence is a measure of how confident one is in the strength value. Confidence is related to the value of count. The more pieces of evidence upon which the strength is determined, the higher the confidence in the strength value.
The attention value is determined by what the system is working upon at the moment. It is a measure of the importance of an Atom to the system at a point in time. As I write this, for example, “Atoms” in my mind related to the attention allocation system (Economic Attention Networks) would have a high attention (or importance) value. —matt > On May 2, 2017, at 8:41 AM, nageenn18 <[email protected]> wrote: > > Dear all, > Can anyone here explain in detail tge concept of truth value > -stregnth > -confidence > -count > What is the concept of attention value. > Explain with example please > > > > Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone. > > -------- Original message -------- > From: 'Nil Geisweiller' via opencog <[email protected]> > Date: 5/2/17 10:45 AM (GMT+05:00) > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected], Linas Vepstas <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [opencog-dev] Pros and cons > > 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 a topic in the Google > Groups "opencog" group. > To unsubscribe from this topic, visit > https://groups.google.com/d/topic/opencog/CMNQ85EfBMU/unsubscribe. > To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, 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. > > -- > 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] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog > <https://groups.google.com/group/opencog>. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/59089a8b.9090620a.3f40a.8feb%40mx.google.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/59089a8b.9090620a.3f40a.8feb%40mx.google.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout > <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/64B610FB-5817-4A9B-A42F-9269F8934AD0%40gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
