Re: [opencog-dev] Trying to implement path reasoning on Predicates but running into inference problems.

Hmmm. The code snippet I saw looks nothing like what the PLN deduction rule should look like, but rather a heuristic that binarizes the result perhaps for efficiency or for some specialized use case. As Linas says, Nil might know more about why that deduction rule is coded the way it is. The

Re: [opencog-dev] Trying to implement path reasoning on Predicates but running into inference problems.

Hi Alex, The following caught my eye: On Wed, Jan 8, 2020 at 8:39 AM Alexander Gabriel wrote: > H > def deduction_formula(AC, AB, BC): > tv1 = AB.tv > tv2 = BC.tv > if tv1.mean > 0.5 and tv2.mean > 0.5 and tv1.confidence > 0.5 and > tv2.confidence > > 0.5: > AC.tv =

Re: [opencog-dev] Trying to implement path reasoning on Predicates but running into inference problems.

Hi Linas! > This is a relatively minor point, and for a demo, scheme or python > formulas are sufficient, but for anything that you expect to run quickly, > the native formulas would be better. > Thanks for the tip! :) Do you have any idea why the formula/code fails to produce proper

Re: [opencog-dev] Trying to implement path reasoning on Predicates but running into inference problems.

Hi Linas, > First Alex: As Nil already noted, the results you posted look reasonable, > except that the truth value was insane, given the code snippets you posted. > I see two possibilities: > -- in addition to running your rule, some other rules are running, and > generating a different TV.

Re: [opencog-dev] Trying to implement path reasoning on Predicates but running into inference problems.

Am Freitag, 10. Januar 2020 22:44:45 UTC schrieb linas: > > I'm not sure what to make of the email below. By "query", do you mean "run > cog-execute! on a BindLink"? > I'm running this: queries = [] # WARN: if I add this to the queries it adds the links to the atomspace (as it

Re: [opencog-dev] Trying to implement path reasoning on Predicates but running into inference problems.

Hi Matt, Hi Alex: First Alex: As Nil already noted, the results you posted look reasonable, except that the truth value was insane, given the code snippets you posted. I see two possibilities: -- in addition to running your rule, some other rules are running, and generating a different TV. Maybe

Re: [opencog-dev] Trying to implement path reasoning on Predicates but running into inference problems.

On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 7:58 AM Alexander Gabriel wrote: > > When I try to do that with rules defined in scheme like this: > > MemberLink(DefinedSchemaNode("bc-deduction-rule-name"), rbs) > > There's a typo in the above. It should be " bc-deduction-rule" not "bc-deduction-rule-name". Which is

Re: [opencog-dev] Trying to implement path reasoning on Predicates but running into inference problems.

I'm not sure what to make of the email below. By "query", do you mean "run cog-execute! on a BindLink"? if so, then you are only running the pattern matcher, and not the URE. The pattern matcher never sets or changes truth values, so you describe an impossible situation. So, I guess you are

Re: [opencog-dev] Trying to implement path reasoning on Predicates but running into inference problems.

On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 2:49 PM Alexander Gabriel wrote: > Hi Linas! > > >> This is a relatively minor point, and for a demo, scheme or python >> formulas are sufficient, but for anything that you expect to run quickly, >> the native formulas would be better. >> > > Thanks for the tip! :) > Do

Re: [opencog-dev] Trying to implement path reasoning on Predicates but running into inference problems.

Yeah, beats me. I don't know how the chainer works. Nil will know more. --linas On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 4:50 PM Alexander Gabriel wrote: > > > Am Freitag, 10. Januar 2020 22:44:45 UTC schrieb linas: >> >> I'm not sure what to make of the email below. By "query", do you mean >> "run cog-execute!

Re: [opencog-dev] Trying to implement path reasoning on Predicates but running into inference problems.

Am Freitag, 10. Januar 2020 06:20:01 UTC schrieb Nil: > > > The existing deduction rules > > > https://github.com/opencog/pln/blob/master/opencog/pln/rules/term/deduction.scm > > > are only defined for implication and inheritance links, so if you were > to use them you'd have to formulate

Re: [opencog-dev] Trying to implement path reasoning on Predicates but running into inference problems.

Hi Alex, On 1/10/20 12:59 PM, Alexander Gabriel wrote: I boiled the test code down a bit to make it easier to parse. You can find it here . 1. I've never used the Python binding, but I would think/hope that you

Re: [opencog-dev] Trying to implement path reasoning on Predicates but running into inference problems.

Am Freitag, 10. Januar 2020 12:45:48 UTC schrieb Nil: > > Hi Alex, > > On 1/10/20 12:59 PM, Alexander Gabriel wrote: > > I boiled the test code down a bit to make it easier to parse. You can > > find it here > > < > https://gist.github.com/alexander-gabriel/8e4593e76120752cbccb9a5c73cec691>.

Re: [opencog-dev] Trying to implement path reasoning on Predicates but running into inference problems.

>1. I've never used the Python binding, but I would think/hope that you >don't need to invoke scheme to configure it. Can someone comment on >that? The following Python code: MemberLink(DefinedSchemaNode("conditional-full-instantiation-implication-meta-rule-name"),