AIKR CG Plans and Leadership

Milton, Owen:

I agree we need a plan that identifies AIKR deliverables.
Building on the momentum created by the awareness work , I propose we use
the STRATML created for the eGovernance as our startpoint. Specifically, we
should  use the STRAML template to create a new AIKR plan and then connect
it to the eGovenance STRATML subplan.

Acknowledging that our current chair is overloaded with commitments , I
also propose that we (1) confirm that we should continue as a CG and (2)
elect  at least two members into leadership positions.


Carl Mattocks



It was a pleasure to clarify


On Sun, Nov 24, 2019 at 10:43 PM Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net> wrote:

> 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> <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 *
>
>
>
>