well, 'm trying to say something more than that. They're not just "statistics based on abstraction", and the abstractions have nothing to do with natural language; they can be formed for any pattern whatsoever.
The "abstractions" are the decomposed parts or components of a pattern. They describe how one part of a pattern fits with another part, how it interacts with another part. Back in they day, you had a fascination with combinators, and the reason for that was legit: combinators represent a problem in certain nice ways that lambda cannot do. What I'm saying is that disjuncts are kind-of-like combinators. They abstract away the connection into a connector, so that the details of the connection no longer matter. The deal was that combinators were not typed (because lambda calculus is not typed). I claim that the disjuncts are like combinators, but they carry the types along with them. Also, they carry directional information, unlike the combinators: the combinatores were hard to use, because they carried implicit positional information: you had to write them in the correct order. With disjuncts, you don't have to write them in any order, you nly have to connect them in the correct order. Its is this disentanglement form order and relation dependencies that make them powerful. You no longer have to deal with the complexities of the full pattern, or the string-limitations of lambda. --linas On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 1:50 AM, Ben Goertzel <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Linas Vepstas <[email protected]> > wrote: > > So same here: the disjuncts are the flattened parts of a pattern. you can > > glue them together to get the whole complex pattern, but by working with > the > > flattened pieces, everything becomes much much simpler. So your > word-tuples > > are undoubtedly non-linear: and that is the point: don't work with > > word-tuples. They are a difficult, bad representation. > > > Yes, that much is very clear ... one big advantage of our approach is > that we're NOT just acting on word tuples and doing statistics; we're > alternating steps of > > -- forming parse trees > > -- gathering statistics based on abstractions from these parse trees > > ... ben > > -- > 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 > "link-grammar" 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/link-grammar. > 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/CAHrUA34fRNKkogdc0njkweYLfMryiCZoEpun2PX-b_ef7Bj-sg%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
