- From: Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2018 12:14:17 +0800
- To: Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net>
- Cc: public-aikr@w3.org
Thanks all Thanks Owen for extracting paradigms and technologies (can you pls remind us how you extract this info from the text) Good news is that there is work to be done to clear up the rubbish, within our scope Questions: Is the type of diagram being proposed useful? IF so, are X, Y axes adequate, or should thre be a Z or Zn axis added if not, what type of diagram could be more useful is the tripartition not good, should there be more or less partitions, and why are the classes and subclasses in the diagram and text correctly identified and adequately repreenting the domain are the relationships between these classes/entities identified and represented correctly what other improvements can be made to this diagram? If we can come up with something useful and informative, we can publish it and ping Forbes PDM I On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 10:38 AM Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net> wrote: > > The graphic hurts my eyes and I haven't even tried to figure out what its unreadable text says. However, the "problems" (values) as well as the paradigms and technologies identified in the body of the article make reasonable sense to me -- especially now that I've rendered them in StratML format at http://stratml.us/carmel/iso/AIKMwStyle.xml > > I am particularly interested in the "planning problem": the capability of setting and achieving goals. > > Owen Ambur > Chair, StratML Working Group > Co-Chair Emeritus, xml.gov CoP > Webmaster, FIRM > > -----Original Message----- > From: Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com> > Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2018 8:04 PM > To: public-aikr@w3.org > Subject: welcome new members and AI map > > Came across this nice article and I kind of like this map a lot > https://www.forbes.com/sites/cognitiveworld/2018/08/22/ai-knowledge-map-how-to-classify-ai-technologies/#3e5a2a317773 > > I was hoping we could produce something like this, but if people think this is good enough we can use it (and credit the author accordingly) as a starting point > > Does anybody see anything on this map that needs discussion or modification, is everybody ok to use it as a cocneptual background to develop further? > > Cheers > > PDM > > >
Received on Tuesday, 18 December 2018 04:15:16 UTC