On 06/01/2017 04:59 PM, Shujing Ke wrote:
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?
I'd say all of them, at any depth. The corpus I gave you is not gonna contain any useful pattern anyway, it's just an exercise at this point.
Nil
On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 3:52 PM, Shujing Ke <shujin...@gmail.com <mailto: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 <mailto: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/Pattern_Miner_Prospective_Examples#patterns_in_PLN_inference_histories <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 <ngeis...@googlemail.com <mailto:ngeis...@googlemail.com> <mailto: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_Examples#patterns_in_PLN_inference_histories><http://wiki.opencog.org/w/Pattern_Miner_Prospective_Examples#patterns_in_PLN_inference_histories<http://wiki.opencog.org/w/Pattern_Miner_Prospective_Examples#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/babb8f59-9817-f9f3-218b-2975cca792d3%40gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
