Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

Many of these examples have to do with the 7+/-2 limitation of human (and many other animals') short-term/working memory capacity, which is a significant factor in human cognition but doesn't constrain human long-term memory capacity... ben On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 7:50 AM, Linas Vepstas

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 4:30 PM, 'Nil Geisweiller' via opencog < opencog@googlegroups.com> wrote: > Hehe :-D > > Maybe Linas means incompressible things. > Some examples: - Link grammar knows 10K words. Link grammar is not intelligent - My dog knows 10 words. Humans are not 10K / 10 = 1000

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

> I think the abstract part of OpenPsi, provisionally called OCD, should be > clearly taken away and put in another directory. If it's abstract enough it > could even live in the AtomSpace repo. That would be convenient as the URE > needs such a decision code. > Yes. Last I tried to work with it,

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

On 03/17/2018 05:02 PM, Linas Vepstas wrote: The limit of human knowledge is somewhere near there.  Most humans do not contain more than 10 or 20 books of knowledge; geniuses might get up to 100 or maybe more.  But that's the limit. Figure maybe ten pages per topic or concept, and that is the

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

Hehe :-D Maybe Linas means incompressible things. Nil On 03/17/2018 05:34 PM, Linas Vepstas wrote: On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 10:56 PM, Ben Goertzel > wrote: This thread has gone a weird-ass direction... Of course an adult human knows

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

On 03/17/2018 07:41 AM, Linas Vepstas wrote:> My suspicion is that cognitive control, a la OpenPsi, almost always need to account for resources (time in particular). So for instance if a cognitive process needs to fetch some knowledge it will only allow itself to do some for a

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

"To see a World in a Grain of Sand And a Heaven in a Wild Flower, Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand And Eternity in an hour. A Robin Redbreast in a Cage Puts all Heaven in a Rage. A dove house fill’d with doves and pigeons Shudders Hell thro’ all its regions. A Dog starv’d at his Master’s

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

I believe this thread has run way past its useful course, and suggest we kill it. On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 3:40 PM, Linas Vepstas wrote: > > > On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 11:00 PM, Alexey Potapov > wrote: > >> This discussion seems senseless. You

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 11:00 PM, Alexey Potapov wrote: > This discussion seems senseless. You literally said: "No human can > remember 1 of anything whatsoever". Now, you said that words don't > belong to the category of "anything whatsoever". Words have meaning, >

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 10:56 PM, Ben Goertzel wrote: > This thread has gone a weird-ass direction... > > Of course an adult human knows way more than 10K things but I don't > Oh come on Ben. Of course a single human cannot know that much. That's an absurdity. Humans are

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

*** The limit of human knowledge is somewhere near there. Most humans do not contain more than 10 or 20 books of knowledge; geniuses might get up to 100 or maybe more. But that's the limit. Figure maybe ten pages per topic or concept, and that is the limit of how much one person can know (over a

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

To be clear: when I say "knowing things", I mean "concepts". Think of "dogs", and writing down everything you know about dogs. I suppose that could fill at least 2 pages, maybe 10 pages of writing, and then you've exhausted everything you know about dogs. That would count as "knowing one thing"

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

This discussion seems senseless. You literally said: "No human can remember 1 of anything whatsoever". Now, you said that words don't belong to the category of "anything whatsoever". Words have meaning, spelling, pronunciation. Each Chinese character has the specific stroke order. There are

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

This thread has gone a weird-ass direction... Of course an adult human knows way more than 10K things but I don't even have time just now to scroll up and see how the conversation got here !!! On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 10:30 PM, Linas Vepstas wrote: > ?? > > I'm pretty

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

?? I'm pretty sure I know a lot more than 1 words. That is not at all comparable to knowing 1 things. Knowing 2 words is comparable to knowing maybe 500 things. How, exactly, are you measuring knowledge? --linas On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 3:47 PM, Alexey Potapov

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

> > > No human can remember 1 of anything whatsoever. The human brain is > just simply not that big. > Please, stop making such stupid claims. This is so obviously wrong that I'm not sure if there is any sense to argue. "No human", "1 of anything", "not that big"??? I will not refer to

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 6:20 PM, Alexey Potapov wrote: > > >> And forget the 10 thousand number. No human can do that, not from memory. >> > > I guess you are wrong. There are people who can recall any of 1 go > games. > That's total bullshit. Its the Japanese

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 2:49 PM, Nil Geisweiller wrote: > On 03/15/2018 08:19 AM, Linas Vepstas wrote: > >> >> >> On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 1:12 AM, Nil Geisweiller > > wrote: >> >> Regarding speeding up pattern

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

BTW I did not forget this thread but got busy, I will respond on the weekend ;) On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 9:19 PM, Alexey Potapov wrote: > FYI we have experimented with several other similar knowledge bases and > queries including NumberNode and GreaterThanLink, and for all of

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

FYI we have experimented with several other similar knowledge bases and queries including NumberNode and GreaterThanLink, and for all of them PM works fine in linear time. So, there is no common problem with virtual links. We just accidentally started with an unlikely pathological example, which

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

> And forget the 10 thousand number. No human can do that, not from memory. > I guess you are wrong. There are people who can recall any of 1 go games. Why shouldn't people be able to solve simpler tasks, at least if they are professionally dedicated to them? Also, as well studied by

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

On 03/15/2018 08:19 AM, Linas Vepstas wrote: On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 1:12 AM, Nil Geisweiller > wrote: Regarding speeding up pattern matcher queries for numerical and such domains other than space-time, maybe we could use

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 1:18 AM, Nil Geisweiller wrote: > > What I had understood was to have the PM delegates to the space server > space-related queries, but this would be transparent to the user, so it > does require to hack the PM in that respect, maybe it's a non

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

On 03/15/2018 07:54 AM, Alexey Potapov wrote: > You can say: just don't use PM for such queries. Why not?  For certain kinds of basic prepositional queries, such as taller, closer, larger, next-to, above, behind, is-a-part-of, is related-to -- we need a good, effective

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 12:54 AM, Alexey Potapov wrote: > >> >>> > You can say: just don't use PM for such queries. >> >> >> Why not? For certain kinds of basic prepositional queries, such as >> taller, closer, larger, next-to, above, behind, is-a-part-of, is related-to >>

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

> > > How many domains are there? one? two? three? "satisfiability modulo > theories" > That's what those words mean. > Any relation based on individual properties of objects. > > I'm totally confused. "Greater than" is just a theory. Its like any other > theory. > What exactly, is the problem

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

Regarding speeding up pattern matcher queries for numerical and such domains other than space-time, maybe we could use cover trees. It does involve defining a distance measure though. When non-obvious, maybe such measure can be learned. Regarding queries taking too long, Linas suggested to make

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 12:37 AM, Alexey Potapov wrote: > >> So this is an arithmetic query, rather than a spatial query -- but the >> two cases >> are similar in that both arithmetic operations and spatial operations are >> "special domains" with their own algebras, and by

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

> > > >> > You can say: just don't use PM for such queries. > > > Why not? For certain kinds of basic prepositional queries, such as > taller, closer, larger, next-to, above, behind, is-a-part-of, is related-to > -- we need a good, effective query system for those, Currently, the pattern >

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

> > > So this is an arithmetic query, rather than a spatial query -- but the two > cases > are similar in that both arithmetic operations and spatial operations are > "special domains" with their own algebras, and by using those algebras one > can answer queries in those domains more efficiently

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 8:29 PM, Ben Goertzel wrote: > Let me preface this by noting that I am really psyched we are having this > sort of discussion ;) ... > I agree with Ben; and have nothing to add to his replies. So below is a different slant on things. > > > - Let's

Re: [opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

Let me preface this by noting that I am really psyched we are having this sort of discussion ;) ... > - Let's imagine I know 1 people, and I'm asked if I know a family in > which the difference in ages of two children is larger than 15 years (a wife > is taller than a husband more than by 20

[opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 3:14 AM, Alexey Potapov wrote: > Efficient data structures and algos to deal with numeric data are > necessary, > What kind of numeric data? Again, please note that the atomspace has two classes of data: peristent, immutable, globally-unique "Atoms"

[opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 2:52 AM, Ben Goertzel wrote: > > So linking the PM to the SpaceServer would be clearly beneficial for > many applications and would enable space and/or time related PM > queries to get resolved much more rapidly... > Yes. I'm far less interested in

[opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 2:30 AM, Nil Geisweiller wrote: > So if I understand well, the appropriate fix would be to use AtTimeLink > and AtLocationLink and have the pattern matcher specially handles this via > perhaps relaying the spatio-temporal component of the query to

[opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

That said, I like the idea of having automated learning used to learn predicates that serve in the PM callbacks On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:41 PM, Ben Goertzel wrote: > Conceptually -- > A fixed algo for solving NP-complete problems of a particular type, of > bounded size

[opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

Conceptually -- A fixed algo for solving NP-complete problems of a particular type, of bounded size wrote: > Efficient data structures and algos to deal with

[opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

So if I understand well, the appropriate fix would be to use AtTimeLink and AtLocationLink and have the pattern matcher specially handles this via perhaps relaying the spatio-temporal component of the query to the space server. I know almost nothing about the current state of space server so

[opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

On 03/13/2018 09:20 AM, Nil Geisweiller wrote: used to manage my emails in Emacs via Wonderlust, but it's much slower It's spelled Wanderlust. Nil On 03/13/2018 07:07 AM, Linas Vepstas wrote: I hope you can read the below. It took me a while to type it in. I think maybe I'm the victim of

[opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

Linas, your email looked perfectly fine to me. I would advice you to not use Google webmail interface. Personally, I use Thunderbird. It's completely community driven (unlike Firefox), allows to read and write emails off-line. The only thing I miss is external editor support so I can easily

[opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

Hi, To repeat my earlier remarks, and add a few more: On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:42 PM, Alexey Potapov wrote: > > Yes. But Pattern Matcher compares all pairs of bounding boxes making it > quadratic. Yes, there is supposed to be a space-server that is supposed to be

[opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

I hope you can read the below. It took me a while to type it in. I think maybe I'm the victim of some kind of google A/B testing today, because for me, my own emails are totally unreadable. Let me know if you suspect you didn't receive everything I sent ... --linas On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 12:05

[opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

OK, trying again. Maybe the third time it will work right. -- Linas On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 12:04 AM, Linas Vepstas wrote: > Resending. My email agent is formatting and indenting bizarrely. > I don't understand why its 2018 and something as simple as email > has ugly and

[opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

Resending. My email agent is formatting and indenting bizarrely. I don't understand why its 2018 and something as simple as email has ugly and unreliable formating. Is this what the heat death of the universe looks like? --linas On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 11:55 PM, Linas Vepstas

[opencog-dev] Re: Pattern Matching performance

Hi, On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 3:24 AM, Nil Geisweiller wrote: > Hi, > > I'm adding Linas, the author of the pattern matcher, who knows it better > than I do. Also, generally speaking, feel free to use the opencog list, that > way all opencog community can participate. > >