- From: Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2018 15:55:14 +0800
- To: milea.danviorel@gmail.com
- Cc: Vinay Chaudhri <vinay_chaudhri@yahoo.com>, public-aikr@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAMXe=SqV4T-BBFbARL-go0G+=Zry=Ttq=AaTAaRCc6U4sohv2Q@mail.gmail.com>
Viorel thank you, I wonder if you could give a brief narrative description of this diagram, some commentary and context You should be able to upload it/link the image and narrative to our group's pages, let me know if you need help with that Dr Paola Di Maio On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:22 PM Viorel Milea <milea.danviorel@gmail.com> wrote: > Dear Paola, > > Perhaps the attached diagram will be useful. > > Kind regards, > > Viorel > > > [image: Mailtrack] > <https://mailtrack.io?utm_source=gmail&utm_medium=signature&utm_campaign=signaturevirality5&> Sender > notified by > Mailtrack > <https://mailtrack.io?utm_source=gmail&utm_medium=signature&utm_campaign=signaturevirality5&> 11/01/18, > 3:15:13 PM > > On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 2:03 PM Vinay K. Chaudhri < > vinay_chaudhri@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> Paola, >> >> For R&N, please see: >> https://www.amazon.com/Artificial-Intelligence-Approach-Stuart-Russell/dp/9332543518/ >> >> For AAAI's efforts in this area, please see: >> https://aitopics.org/misc/about >> >> There is, obviously, room for contribution. >> >> These days to impact web standards, a viable approach seems to be to join >> an internet company (or at least, start by securing their support :-) >> >> Best, >> >> Vinay. >> >> On 10/31/2018 12:25 AM, Paola Di Maio wrote: >> >> Vinay >> >> Thanks a lot for your questions, see my comments below in italics >> but of course , everyone, please feel free to address Vinay's qs as you >> see fit >> although I initiated this, it belongs to all members >> >>> >>> ~~~~~ >>> The overall goal/mission of this community group is to explore the >>> requirements, best practices and implementation options for the >>> conceptualization and specification of domain knowledge in AI. >>> ~~~~~ >>> "Conceptualization and specification of domain knowledge" reminds of the >>> expert systems era and a family of techniques that have little overlap with >>> the current ML approaches. While in silicon valley, ML and AI are largely >>> used interchangeably, those with some historical perspective, recognize the >>> evolution of techniques. For consider this video that explains the DARPA >>> perspective on AI to encompass three phases of AI. >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-O01G3tSYpU >>> >> >> *thanks * >> >>> >>> It will be helpful for this group to refine its description of the set >>> of AI techniques that are of interest. >>> >> >> *thanks, I ll watch and take input but everyone feel free!* >> >>> >>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>> We plan to place particular emphasis on the identification and the >>> representation of AI facets and various aspects (technology, legislation, >>> ethics etc) with the purpose to facilitate knowledge exchange and reuse. >>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>> The above statement, even though, appears agnostic to the specific >>> technique being used, but really pertains to the second phase (ie, >>> ML-oriented) techniques. >>> >> >> *uhm, why do you think so? If anything it refers to multifaceting of >> knowledge domain modelling tech**niques (thats where I get the idea >> from) but it could be that multifaceting also used in ML? * >> >> These days we do not hear too many people talking about the legislation >>> and ethics around the first-phase (ie, rule-based) techniques. >>> >>> *part of the problem we are trying to address, perhaps? * >> >>> ~~~~~~~~ >>> Therefore the proposed outcomes could be instrumental to research and >>> advancement of science and inquiry, as well as to increase the level of >>> public awareness in general to enable learning and participation. >>> ~~~~~~~~~ >>> There are other efforts to educate public about AI. E.g., there is an AI >>> for K-12 initiative, and AAAI engages in considerable outreach to general >>> community. It is not clear to me why a W3C group needs to be devoted to >>> this problem. >>> >>> *the way I see it: * >> *'education' is not just for schools, but for everyone who continues to >> learn-and we must* >> >> - *AI (in various forms) are powering our information systems AND the >> web (the way the web works, and the doesnt work etc)* >> - *W3C is among other things a standardization body for the web* >> - *plus: W3C community groups and workgroups are highly >> collaborative, open to read and write, and fairly inclusive by design* >> - *If *we manage to construct somethingk, this could become a WG and >> possibly a starndard >> >> >> These reasons for me* make a unique and compelling argument in support >> of an open collaborative forum which could serve **XAI among other >> things* >> *do we need a web stardard for XAI? I think so, maybe* >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>> * Proposed outcomes:* >>> >>> - A comprehensive list of open access resources >>> <https://www.w3.org/community/aikr/welcome/ai-kr-task-list/knowledge-sources-for-ai-kr/> >>> in both AI and KR (useful to teaching and research) >>> - A set of metadata >>> <https://www.w3..org/community/aikr/welcome/ai-kr-task-list/metadata/> >>> derived from these resources >>> - A concept map <https://www.w3.org/community/aikr/concept-maps/> of >>> the domain >>> - A natural language vocabulary to represent various aspects of AI >>> - One or more encoding/implementations/ machine language version of >>> the vocabulary, such as ChatBot Natural Language Understanding & Natural >>> Language Generation >>> - Methods for KR management, especially Natural Language Learning / >>> Semantic Memory >>> >>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>> These sound like useful set of outcomes, but it is not clear who are >>> they meant for, and who is it going to use them? >>> There may already exist such resources in some sub-areas, e.g., NLP >>> tools, ontology editors, etc. >>> >> >> *The problem that I think we face is that there is 'no shared >> conceptualization' for AI (using an old metaphore) and no common language >> (the same argument that we would make if we wanted to come up with, say an >> ontology for AI. I have not seen any resources or public effort devoted to >> this, but if you do please point is, because a collaboration would >> definitely be on, I think* >> >> There is also some degree of coverage of these topics in the standard >>> textbooks such as R&N. >>> >> *url plz? the degree of coverage I have seen so far is not fit for >> purpose (see above) but again, please point us* >> >> >>> Are you proposing to write a book? build a catalogue? >>> >> either/both/neither >> *I am not proposing anything at the moment, but the ideas above sound >> good if useful* >> *we could also do a movie :-) (or rather an educational video)* >> *what I personally aim for is to clarify what is AI (for the purpose of >> accountability and reliability) since there is a lot of hype and confusion >> being propagated at the moment* >> >> >>> Should you be working with AAAI on these? >>> >> *I am a member o AAAI (or I was at some point) is there a discussion >> group on AI?* >> *A web page? please feel free to enter related efforts in the google form >> linked on the group home page, or post here * >> >> >>> How would you maintain them as things change? >>> >> *If there are people devoted to the maintenance, future generations can >> maintain* >> *if nobody is around to follow up, the outcomes would become frozen in >> time, or fossilized* >> *as a testimony of our restlessness around the issues at hand* >> >> Tell us more about you >> >> >> >>> Best Wishes, >>> Vinay. >>> >>> >>> >>
Received on Friday, 2 November 2018 07:56:14 UTC