OK, I will try to mine EOLs first. Thanks : )

Shujing

On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 7:25 AM, Nil Geisweiller <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 06/01/2017 01:32 AM, Shujing Ke wrote:
>
>> Hi, Nil and Ben,
>>
>> I studied the corpus. Is each BindLink one instance of inference? So
>>
>
> Yes.
>
> that each BindLink should be considered as primitve / atomic -  one
>> pattern should be one BindLink; any Links inside a BindLink should not be
>> mined separatly, right? For example,
>>
>
> No they can and should be mined separately as well. Specifically what we
> are interested in are the structures of ExecutionOutputLink (EOL). The
> third argument of an inference BindLink is systematically gonna be an EOL
> wrapping other EOLs, and we are mostly interested in mining these EOLs. But
> ultimately mining the whole BindLink might be useful too. We may want to do
> both, but for starter only mine patterns with an EOL as root link.
>
>
>
>>        (InheritanceLink
>>          (VariableNode "$X")
>>          (PatternVariableNode "var1")
>>        )
>>        (InheritanceLink
>>          (VariableNode "$X")
>>          (VariableNode "$B-6266d6f2")
>>        )
>>        (InheritanceLink
>>          (VariableNode "$B-6266d6f2")
>>          (PatternVariableNode "var1")
>>        )
>>
>> This is a pattern that may be mined by patten miner from the PLN corpus
>> under a general purpose. But it is not that kind of expected patterns as
>> descriped in http://wiki.opencog.org/w/Pattern_Miner_Prospective_Examples
>> #patterns_in_PLN_inference_histories
>>
>> Actually, the particular goal here is not to mine any connected patterns
>> freely, it is to mine a particular type of patterns - abstraction  of
>> BindLinks of the same structures. If two BindLinks have different
>> structures, even they share one or several Nodes, patterns still should not
>> be extracted from them. For example,
>>
>> (BindLink
>>    (LinkTypeA
>>           (NodeType_a "someNode1")
>>           (NodeType_b "someNode2")
>>    )
>>    (LinkTypeB
>>           (NodeType_c "someNode3")
>>           (LinkTypeC
>>                 (NodeType_c "someNode3")
>>                 (NodeType_d "someNode4")
>>            )
>>    )
>> )
>>
>>
>> (BindLink
>>    (LinkTypeA
>>           (NodeType_a "someNode1")
>>           (NodeType_e "someNode5)
>>    )
>>    (LinkTypeD
>>           (NodeType_e "someNode5")
>>           (NodeType_f  "someNode6")
>>    )
>> )
>>
>> This two BindLinks share the same Node (NodeType_a "someNode1"),  a
>> common pattern of   (LinkTypeA) can be extracted for mining general
>> patterns, but these two BindLinks have different structures - the first
>> BindLink contains a LinkTypeA , a LinkTypeB and a LinkTypeC; the second
>> BindLink contains a LinkTypeA and a LinkTypeD. So despite the ultimate goal
>> of AGI, to learning this type of patterns more effectively, it's better to
>> find all the BindLinks with same structures, and then apply some kind of
>> induction learning algorithm on them. What do you think?
>>
>
> No we want to extract patterns across BindLinks (or EOLs) that have
> different structures, what I believe the pattern miner is good at, right?
>
> Nil
>
>
>> But I will still give it a try with Pattern Miner.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Nil Geisweiller <[email protected]
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>>     Hi,
>>
>>     I've corrected the inferences (note that ExecutionLink are actually
>>     ExecutionOutputLink because the "inference trails" are actually
>>     inferences to be executed rather than records).
>>
>>     Also I've attached a file with ~500 inferences obtained from running
>>     the BackwardChainerUTest, can generate many more if needed.
>>
>>     Nil
>>
>>     On 05/21/2017 06:17 PM, Ben Goertzel wrote:
>>
>>         Nil,
>>
>>         I wrote down our two sketchy examples of patterns to be mined
>>         from PLN
>>         inference patterns, from our F2F discussion last week, here:
>>
>>         http://wiki.opencog.org/w/Pattern_Miner_Prospective_Examples
>> #patterns_in_PLN_inference_histories
>>         <http://wiki.opencog.org/w/Pattern_Miner_Prospective_Example
>> s#patterns_in_PLN_inference_histories>
>>
>>         It will be good if you can write these out in the fully explicit
>>         Atomese format that PLN actually uses to save its inference
>>         histories...
>>
>>         thx!
>>         ben
>>
>>
>>

-- 
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/CALpD4-KBLmg0g0x%2BXEJfpav0W32YkcA-T1fO%2BEqZo1a0RQPNhQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to