Oh, another question: is to mine patterns that contains at least one ExecutionOutputLink, or to mine patterns that only contains ExecutionOutputLinks and the Links inside ExecutionOutputLinks?
On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Shujing Ke <shujin...@gmail.com> wrote: > OK, I will try to mine EOLs first. Thanks : ) > > Shujing > > On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 7:25 AM, Nil Geisweiller <ngeis...@googlemail.com> > 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/Patt >>> ern_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 < >>> ngeis...@googlemail.com <mailto:ngeis...@googlemail.com>> 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 opencog+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to opencog@googlegroups.com. 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-L0Nm5jNrrG%3DBdJ52SSwaMCXfu3T7fTzP8UGa21fL-CZw%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
