Linas, thanks for a thoughtful explanations :-)

2017-05-10 2:53 GMT+02:00 Linas Vepstas <[email protected]>:

> Hi Ivan,
>
> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 6:19 PM, Ivan Vodišek <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I think it was a very good decision not to be tied to a specific logic
>> system, but to go a level further - to develop Atomese that can describe
>> any system. I just don't get why didn't all of OpenCog add-ons (like MOSES)
>> developed in Atomese.
>>
>
> History. The moses vertex was supposed to be the same thing as the atom;
> that was always the intent, but no one really knew how to design an atom
> correctly.  It still doesn't quite feel right, it still seems kind-of
> heavy, clunky, somehow.
>
> Anyway, given the pressure of writing code and getting good performance
> out of it ... design decisions get made, and the moses vertex-atom was
> created before the opencog-atom was fully designed.
>
>
>> Why do you still have to use C, Scheme, Python and possibly other
>> languages?
>>
>
> Because atomese is a horrible language for humans. Its not meant for
> humans -- its really like an IL, its meant to hold data structures that
> algorithms can mutate into various forms.
>
> It would be cool if we had a compiler for it, but that does not yet seem
> urgent, and might be premature, its still not clear that everything got
> done right.
>
>
>> In my opinion, universal rule rewriting system such is Atomese powered by
>> chainers (did I get it right?) should be as complete as lambda calculus,
>> thus should be capable to describe any conceivable algorithm.
>>
>
> Uh, yes, there is an explicit lambda atom in atomese, and also an explicit
> beta-reduction atom, and the evaluator can evaluate them, so you can
> certainly map all of lambda calculus on there. You can even do a typed,
> probabilistic lambda calculus; atomese has a fairly rich type system.
>
>  http://wiki.opencog.org/w/LambdaLink_and_ScopeLink
> http://wiki.opencog.org/w/PutLink
>
> http://wiki.opencog.org/w/Cog-evaluate!
> http://wiki.opencog.org/w/Cog-execute!
>
>
> I mean, I guess you could layer lisp or scheme on to of atomese, but it
> would be painfully slow, with the current evaluator, and would be quite
> bloated, since atoms are fat.  Atoms get indexed in the atomspace, and that
> ends up being costly in both cpu and ram.
>
> We index them because we want to use the atomspace for KR... which
> conflicts with using them only for performing calculations.  Its a
> balancing act, its hard to figure out where the imbalance is.
>
> --linas
>
>>
>>
>>
>> 2017-05-10 0:56 GMT+02:00 Linas Vepstas <[email protected]>:
>>
>>> Yes, opencog atomese is very much influenced by ideas from prolog.
>>>
>>> However, unlike flora2 and ergo, it just seemed easier to cut loose and
>>> ignore all the other buzz-words: "semantic web" "W3C", RIF, etc because
>>> trying to track all of that, being buzzword compliant, was just wayyy too
>>> much work.
>>>
>>> Also, atomsese is unlike prolog (or flora or ergo) because it's very
>>> interested in probabilistic methods: have not boolean true/false, but have
>>> probabilities attached to everything.  this means that in the end, all the
>>> buzzwords in flora/ergo would need to get ported to a probabilistic,
>>> uncertain-inference framework.  And that changes the game completely.
>>>
>>> Also, another difference: those urls mention
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-logic whereas atomese is a
>>> "meta-logic", so that you can layer f-logic or whatever your favorite
>>> system or logic, on top of atomese.  It tries hard to not care about what
>>> logic or KR system you want to use.  It got pushed that way because of the
>>> goofy arguments between Pei Wang's NARS group, and Opencog's PLN: I just
>>> said -- screw it, make a system that can do either or both at the same
>>> time.  whatever structure or formula you want to use .. Bayesian
>>> probability or something else ... its up to you.  The chainers and the
>>> pattern tools are meant to be generic.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --linas
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 3:09 PM, Dmitry Ponyatov <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> but I am not pursuing this path because I want object-oriented code -
>>>>> the generated code should be of industrial quality.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I see Prolog-derivatives as implementation of backtracking reasoner on
>>>> top of hypergraph knowledge base -- prolog rules look like exclusively
>>>> hypergraph beast.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe you should look here ? This Ergo/Flora system include mix of
>>>>
>>>>    - Minsky frames looks like native representation for object-based
>>>>    software systems, and
>>>>    - Transactional Reasoning represents state machines behavior in
>>>>    logic programming domain.
>>>>
>>>> https://sites.google.com/a/coherentknowledge.com/ergo-suite-tutorial/
>>>>
>>>> and free core at http://flora.sourceforge.net/
>>>>
>>>> Flora-2  (a.k.a. Ergo Lite) is an advanced object-oriented knowledge
>>>> representation and reasoning system. It is a dialect of F-logic with
>>>> numerous extensions, including meta-programming in the style of HiLog,
>>>> logical updates in the style of Transaction Logic, and defeasible
>>>> reasoning. Applications include intelligent agents, Semantic Web,
>>>> knowledge-based networking, ontology management, integration of
>>>> information, security policy analysis, and more.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> At first time I thought about opencog as a partner for Flora, firstly,
>>>> as a visualization tool (it seems Flora lacks it) and as a generic engine
>>>> for non-backtracking applications.
>>>> But I found lot of problems with opencog nonportability and lack of
>>>> prebuilt packages for Debian Linux, not speaking about necessity to shove a
>>>> buggy virtualbox to my win32 host system.
>>>>
>>>> Now I'm playing with http://hypergraphdb.org as standin for opencog at
>>>> this role.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> 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/ms
>>>> gid/opencog/7ead7c35-ec95-4ddf-874c-0f4ddb38a935%40googlegroups.com
>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/7ead7c35-ec95-4ddf-874c-0f4ddb38a935%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/ms
>>> gid/opencog/CAHrUA35mEEiUx6boeWxR4TmtknrUTOLmt2_yNwdmHY8%3D5
>>> A3LCw%40mail.gmail.com
>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAHrUA35mEEiUx6boeWxR4TmtknrUTOLmt2_yNwdmHY8%3D5A3LCw%40mail.gmail.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/ms
>> gid/opencog/CAB5%3Dj6XA7T2E-MKO69_z0sPQWM%2BjftaG3rHbqTCA7YT
>> %2BaucsVw%40mail.gmail.com
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAB5%3Dj6XA7T2E-MKO69_z0sPQWM%2BjftaG3rHbqTCA7YT%2BaucsVw%40mail.gmail.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/CAHrUA36QY_TVh4EGM1yv9WMb9WW2FtU1etm18dxT
> O_DrqhKPWA%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAHrUA36QY_TVh4EGM1yv9WMb9WW2FtU1etm18dxTO_DrqhKPWA%40mail.gmail.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/CAB5%3Dj6VAJdH_i_1bmCL8CPKwwTTTLhVJiMvoQ9QKef9kow-n4w%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to