Re: AI, StratML, SDGs, Dashboards & Collaboration

Owen

I have a few more bits, I generally deliver my work as talks, lectures and
papers
I am working on a Neurosymbolic approaches for AI KR. I am also reviewing
the textbook literature and have identified some gaps, errors and
omissions. and have also provided critiques to the KG output which claims
to be a type of KR without listing the many limitations of KGs as KR.
I ll organise my stuff better and post it for people to build on or
critique or both-

In this sense, if you Owen and others want to do the same, the deliverables
will come from each of us doing one according to our inclination and asking
others to pitch in/contribute something
Apart from your work in StrathML, you have proposed pursuing a
collaboration with FOI. why dont you elaborate on that vision then lead the
effort, if you think that would be a 'deliverable'

That's the organic way of growing. if each of us brings one or two shoots,
at some pointe may be able to collect some fruits. We can take things from
there.

Carl thinks there may be potential for producing a standard out of this
work, so maybe this could be one of this.  So I think the first step
towards the deliverables that you call for will be the product of our own
individual initiatives, and this is why I think it is important that each
member pursues what they are intersted in, and shares their work with
others here

PDM






On Sat, Feb 15, 2020 at 12:44 AM Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net> wrote:

> Paola, I share your concern about whether we, as a group, have the
> capability to deliver results.  Thus far our only deliverable of note is your
> presentation
> <https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1uuNFC8IGd6JrYUdqURhXsy7TRuGJABRdzIPQsddbyno/edit#slide=id.g614f316144_0_96>
> at the IAC conference in Taipei (and I don't if anything may have come of
> it).
>
> It would be good if we could identify one, two, or a few, small
> deliverables that we can actually produce together in the near term.
> Whether a briefing by the authors of this article
> <https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-14108-y> might be among them
> depends (as you suggest) on whether more than few members of our group
> would participate.  Short of conducting something like a Doodle poll
> <https://doodle.com/make-a-poll>, whether others respond to this message
> thread might be a good indicator of such interest.
>
> BTW, I haven't produced any videos and don't spend much, if any, time on
> YouTube.  Nor do I think I'll find the time to do much, if anything, in
> that regard.  However, to the degree that others may, I'd be happy to
> partner with those having strengths that I lack.
>
> Owen
> On 2/14/2020 12:24 AM, Paola Di Maio wrote:
>
> Owen
>
> ....Thank you. I am a co-chair of a group where members are encouraged
> to take the lead in activities they want to work on.
> So far except for stratMLization and two slides one from you and one from
> Carl. and a few resources added to Zotero not many members have actually
> participated much
>
> Personally. I do not feel a video call with this group is a priority,
> because
> I prefer asynchronous activities- it's your idea supported by Carl which I
> think is great
> (let the politics begin?)
>
> I have absolutely no problem with issuing an invitation on behalf of the
> group although now we have a co-chair. who supports your proposal. Since he
> agrees strongly that we should have a videocall perhaps Carl should issue
> the invitation?
>
> Would we want to tell them why we are inviting them to give a presentation?
> (like.... Owen Ambur thinks you should talk to us?)
>
> My only concern is that so far, there has been limited participation to
> group's activities
> what about if they accept our invitation and then only one or two people
> attend the session?
> I d be embarrassed.  I also dont like to do things that other people think
> should be done
> (setting up a video call with FOL)
> because I have a lot on my plate just to advance the things which I think
> should be done.
>
> Likewise with you.  During our call, Carl suggested 'we should ask Owen to
> give a presentation on
> StratML' which of course would be a good idea but. would it be worth to do
> a session with only 2-3 people in attendance?
> Wouldnt it be better that you give a presentation via a youtube video then
> everyone
> can look at it if interested at their own leisure, and schedule a
> call/discussion/panel
>
> Let us think a bit about this then decide?
>
> PDM
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 1:08 PM Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> Paola, in your role as chair of the CG, it would be appropriate for you
>> to issue the invitation and, if they agreeable, to schedule the session.
>>
>> Owen
>> On 2/13/2020 8:31 PM, Paola Di Maio wrote:
>>
>> Owen and Carl
>> please do invite the folks to give us a briefing
>> or would you want me to do that?
>> PDM
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 1:55 AM carl mattocks <carlmattocks@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Regarding authors of 'role of AI in achieving the SDGs:
>>> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-14108-y '
>>>
>>> I agree we should schedule a televideo conference for them to brief us
>>> on their AI activities and explore prospects for collaboration .. including
>>> gain agreement of (their) SDG tracking use case for our AIKR work.
>>>
>>> Carl
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It was a pleasure to clarify
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 12:09 PM Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> According to Wikipedia, intelligence involves perceiving the
>>>> environment and acting to maximize the chance of achieving goals.
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence  The article
>>>> also cites Tesler's Theorem: "AI is whatever hasn't been done yet."  See
>>>> also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AI_effect
>>>>
>>>> While it may be possible for intelligent agents to decipher goals from
>>>> unstructured text, it seems likely they might be able to more effectively
>>>> help us achieve our goals if we make them explicit in terms of near-term
>>>> objectives and performance indicators.  Since that has not yet been done on
>>>> a worldwide scale, why should it not begin with us?
>>>>
>>>> There are more than 4,000 plans in the StratML collection that can be
>>>> used for demonstration purposes, including the SDGs:
>>>> https://stratml.us/drybridge/index.htm#UNSDG
>>>>
>>>> As far as I am aware, however, progress against the SDGs is not being
>>>> reported in an open, standard, machine-readable format.  See, for example,
>>>> the HTML, CSV & PDF at  https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2019/  The
>>>> presentation of the data is actually pretty good.  See, for example,
>>>> https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2019/goal-17/
>>>>
>>>> The problem is that few people know about and take the time to view it,
>>>> much less to do anything about it.  While making the data available in
>>>> open, standard, machine-readable format would not solve that problem, it
>>>> would make it easier for value-added intermediaries to engage stakeholders
>>>> in ways that are more accessible and meaningful to them, e.g., in their own
>>>> personal and organizational/corporate performance plans.  From my
>>>> perspective, failing to do so is an example of artificial ignorance.
>>>> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/artificial-ignorance-owen-ambur/
>>>>
>>>> Here's an article addressing the role of AI in achieving the SDGs:
>>>> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-14108-y  It is relatively
>>>> long and unstructured and I haven't taken the time to read all of it.
>>>> However, here some key point:
>>>>
>>>> We therefore recommend that AI applications that target SDGs are open
>>>> and explicit about guiding ethical principles, also by indicating
>>>> explicitly how they align with the existing guidelines.
>>>>
>>>> See StratML tool, app, and service requirements Objective 8.3: Values
>>>> Alignment
>>>> <https://stratml.us/carmel/iso/SMLTASwStyle.xml#_154473aa-208f-11e6-a80e-7333871eb3cb>
>>>> & Goal 9: Values Validation
>>>> <https://stratml.us/carmel/iso/SMLTASwStyle.xml#_15447c10-208f-11e6-a80e-7333871eb3cb>.
>>>> Those requirements are prime candidates for the application of AI.
>>>>
>>>> On the other hand, the lack of interpretability of AI, which is
>>>> currently one of the challenges of AI research, adds an additional
>>>> complication to the enforcement of such regulatory actions ...
>>>>
>>>> AI developers and agents should be expected, if not required, to
>>>> document their objectives and performance indicators in an open, standard
>>>> format that is both human- and machine-readable.
>>>>
>>>> ... associations such as the Future of Life Institute are reviewing and
>>>> collecting policy actions and shared principles around the world to monitor
>>>> progress towards sustainable-development-friendly AI ...
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps we should schedule a televideo conference for them to brief us
>>>> on their AI activities and explore prospects for collaboration.
>>>> https://stratml.us/carmel/iso/FLIwStyle.xml
>>>>
>>>> A global and science-driven debate to develop shared principles and
>>>> legislation among nations and cultures is necessary to shape a future in
>>>> which AI positively contributes to the achievement of all the SDGs.
>>>>
>>>> Whenever I see calls for legislation and regulation, I view it both as
>>>> a cop out as well as an attempt to dictate to others that which we should
>>>> take upon ourselves to do, in partnership with those who share our values
>>>> and objectives.  Perhaps those who view it as the best way forward should
>>>> either study the China model ... or just stand idly by and wait for them to
>>>> impose it on all of us.  For an alternative model, see
>>>> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/privately-well-practiced-public-policymaking-owen-ambur/
>>>>
>>>> Here's a shorter article on AI & the SDGs:
>>>> https://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/blog/2019/Using_AI_to_help_achieve_Sustainable_Development_Goals.html
>>>> It suggests, "To improve data accessibility, for example, collectors and
>>>> generators of data, whether governments or companies, will need to grant
>>>> greater access to NGOs and others seeking to use the data for public
>>>> service."  However, it shows no awareness of the importance of open,
>>>> machine-readable data standards -- perhaps because usage of such standards
>>>> would reduce the need for consultants ... or, rather, it would require them
>>>> to add higher-level values than massaging amorphous, aimless data.
>>>>
>>>> With respect to dashboards, see
>>>> https://gcn.com/articles/2017/09/12/yet-another-dashboard.aspx &
>>>> https://gcn.com/articles/2017/05/10/machine-readable-data.aspx
>>>>
>>>> I look forward to learning what we might be able to do together along
>>>> these lines.
>>>>
>>>> Owen
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2/8/2020 7:55 PM, Paola Di Maio wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> xml constitutes a structure for language, and certain kinds of AI can
>>>> be built
>>>> using structured language expressions
>>>>
>>>> PDM
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Feb 9, 2020 at 1:34 AM ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program <
>>>> metadataportals@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Can AI be used on StratML utilizing ontologies to create customizable
>>>>> dashboards for project management and collaboration for large networks of
>>>>> collaborating people from different fields of work?
>>>>>
>>>>> Question is of importance in eGovernment, eGovernance and achieving
>>>>> sustainable development goals.
>>>>>
>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>