AIKR CG Plan(s)?

Milton, while much of the content of your proposed report is beyond my 
scope of knowledge and expertise, I volunteer to render in StratML format:

     a) your outline for deliverables, as your plan, and

     b) any set of recommendations for research and standardization that 
may gain consensus in the CG, as the CG's proposed plan.

If one exists, I'd also like to render your research institute's plan in 
StratML format, particularly if it differs from a and b, above.

BTW, this exchange prompted me to recall the proposal Denise Bedford and 
I co-authored in 2013 to specify a Human Reference Model: 
http://ambur.net/HRMProposal.pdf

It appears MS is planning to address parts of that puzzle, in a 
proprietary manner, in Project Cortex: 
http://stratml.us/carmel/iso/MSPCwStyle.xml The name they've chosen is 
of special interest to me in light of its relationship to this article I 
published nearly two years ago: 
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/i-only-had-brain-evolving-prefrontal-core-text-internet-owen-ambur/ 


Owen

On 11/24/2019 10:10 PM, ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I myself, like you Paola and I must assume most of the members of this 
> Community Group would like to see a report written.
>
> Personally I am intent on getting some proposals for creation of 
> standards off the ground as well.
>
> I will look at what we have produced so far, and what we realistically 
> can produce in the next three months.
>
> I am in the process of setting up an applied research institute in 
> which AI will be a central theme.
>
> I will create an outline for deliverables, a wiki, and creating an 
> extensive literature review, and listing of existing institutes, 
> global programs and projects and a listing of existing standards 
> relevant to AI, KR, robotics and related subjects.
>
> All of this structured into a document with an introduction, history 
> of the subject, brief overview of current state of the art, guidelines 
> proposed by the UN, European Union etc,, and a set of our CG 
> recommendations for research and standardization, rounded off with an 
> extensive literature review and listings and directories could serve 
> as the initial deliverable.
>
> This document could then serve as a focus for further discussion in an 
> IG or production of new deliverables in a continued AIKR CG.
>
> Creating this deliverable will take 3 months, and because I have to 
> produce a similar deliverable for my research institute, in less than 
> 3 months, I take it upon myself to get this deliverable produced with 
> collaboration from members of this CG.
>
> Volunteers for support and collaboration, comments, suggestions and 
> ideas are welcome.
>
> Milton Ponson
> GSM: +297 747 8280
> PO Box 1154, Oranjestad
> Aruba, Dutch Caribbean
> Project Paradigm: Bringing the ICT tools for sustainable development 
> to all stakeholders worldwide through collaborative research on 
> applied mathematics, advanced modeling, software and standards development
>
>
> On Friday, November 22, 2019, 10:34:07 PM AST, Paola Di Maio 
> <paola.dimaio@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Greetings folks
>
> according to Ian at W3C, the main difference between between a CG and 
> an IG is
>
>     /Community Groups often produce specifications (called Community
>     Group Reports). Interest Groups typically do not; they focus on
>     discussion. /
>     /
>     /
>
> I hope this group can produce a report, but because we have not seen 
> enough contributions
> since the group started, and I am really busy working on research 
> papers and talks, and I am going to be for the next few months despite 
> my wish to produce something for this group I am struggling to keep 
> up, I wonder if we should
> a) wait until someone perks up to contribute to write a group report,
> b)  change this group to an interest group at some point soon
>
> Thoughts? Objections?
> /Have a great weekend/
> /
> /
> /PDM
> /
>
>