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, Ivan V. 2018-02-19 20:56 GMT+01:00 Linas Vepstas <[email protected]>: > On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 12:25 AM, 'Nil Geisweiller' via opencog > <[email protected]> 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 > generally > > 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. > So > 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 > innovations > in the atomspace: a clear distinction between two different kinds of > "data", having > two different kinds of properties, behaving in different characteristic > ways. > > 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 > part > of the world, the distinction between atoms and valuations is central. > Something > 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 > happening > (the "truth value") > > So that's the general argument of why atoms and valuations are different > from > 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 [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/CAHrUA37RTnsUHC5KxN9TnTcg%2BgsEFxBGu%2Bu_XHKT5emgTXmL7w% > 40mail.gmail.com. > 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/CAB5%3Dj6W%2BMOoi_6pTxYyiqiuWiQWo1nRDZa%3Dp%2Bg1f%2BmEoD9kXVA%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
