i don't have specific code references off the top of my head but imported moses models are boolean functions using these link types, is that relevant here?
On Tuesday, September 14, 2021 at 4:46:59 AM UTC-4 Nil wrote: > On 9/10/21 18:41, Linas Vepstas wrote: > > Nil, BTW: we could arrange the type checker to check that UnionLink > > only ever works with Sets and Concepts, and throw an error in all > > other cases. This is probably stricter than you need it to be, right > > now, but still, type-checking can be a useful thing for debugging. > > Sure. Let's give some time to gradually transition (there might still > be some code using Or, And, Not over sets/concepts), then add these checks. > > Nil > > > ---- > > As to divine intervention vs. bumbling around: I'm still working on > > unsupervised learning, which I hope will someday be able to learn the > > rules of (common-sense) inference. I think I know how to apply it to > > audio and video data, and am looking for anyone who is willing to get > > neck-deep in both code and theory. In particular, for audio and > > video, I need someone who knows GPU audio/video processing libraries, > > and is willing to learn how to wrap them in Atomese. For starters. > > After that comes the painful slog of actually mangling data. > > > > -- linas > > > > On Fri, Sep 10, 2021 at 2:52 AM 'Nil Geisweiller' via opencog > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> Everybody, > >> > >> Linas and I (and a mathematical divine entity, I'm sure) decided to > >> introduce > >> > >> https://wiki.opencog.org/w/UnionLink > >> https://wiki.opencog.org/w/IntersectionLink > >> https://wiki.opencog.org/w/ComplementLink > >> > >> to be used instead of OrLink, AndLink and NotLink when dealing with > >> concepts/sets instead of predicates. > >> > >> Sorry for making such an important decision without much outside > >> consultation, but it happened "naturally" while dealing with the atom > >> type checker, it makes the code simpler, and I believe it will also > >> makes things simpler for human use. After all we already have > >> Inheritance vs Implication, so why not go all the way. > >> > >> We're obviously open to revert that change if it turns out to be a bad > >> idea, but I don't expect it will be. > >> > >> Nil > >> > >> -- > >> 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 view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/fcf938c8-5055-13af-d828-2782005b8839%40gmail.com > . > > > > > > > -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/90f32ce5-a96c-4ff0-a023-8cb180f2c544n%40googlegroups.com.
