Hello, Amirouche Boubekki :)
May I ask, in your opinion, how would triple store be suitable for
describing arbitrary algorithms? Possibility to describe algorithms, as a
dynamic side of some AGI knowledge base, is a must have if we want the
knowledge base system to be complete. I think hypergraphs are handling
algorithms like some lisp based languages do - a few carefully selected
builtin functions (possibly something like lambda expressions), and we are
ready to go. On the other side, triple store is also fine for describing
structured data, but I have a trouble imagining triple store based system
describing algorithms in a *neat way*.
Thank you for your time,
2018-02-19 20:56 GMT+01:00 Linas Vepstas <linasveps...@gmail.com>:
> On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 12:25 AM, 'Nil Geisweiller' via opencog
> <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > On 02/18/2018 11:22 PM, Linas Vepstas wrote:
> > OK, get it, so it seems it would work except for truth values and
> > all valuations. I suppose a way around that would be to insert
> valuations in
> > the atomspace (turn protoatoms into atoms).
> The valuations (as generalized truth values) are meant to to be
> rapidly mutatable,
> avoiding the overhead of the atomspace, and all the associated klunkiness.
> one should only "freeze" them into atoms with caution and trepidation
> - once frozen,
> they become hard or impossible to thaw.
> In my mind, the concept of valuations is one of the more important
> in the atomspace: a clear distinction between two different kinds of
> "data", having
> two different kinds of properties, behaving in different characteristic
> Is it the correct split? I dunno - The choice of "valuation" is
> inspired by model
> theory and set theory, the Löwenheim–Skolem theorem etc. and so, in that
> of the world, the distinction between atoms and valuations is central.
> similar can be said about Bayesian probability, where you make a clean
> split between
> the thing you are talking about (the "atom") and the probability of it
> (the "truth value")
> So that's the general argument of why atoms and valuations are different
> one another - its to allow an interplay that is already recognized in
> other branches
> of mathematics, and has now been ported over to knowledge representation.
> -- Linas
> cassette tapes - analog TV - film cameras - you
> 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 email@example.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
To view this discussion on the web visit
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.