Towards adopting stratml for the AIKRCG 'strategy': Meeting Report

 Towards adopting stratml for the AIKRCG 'strategy' ...
Given we are AIKR ... we understand that Kairos  signifies a proper or
opportune time for action  and our usage of StratMl to EXPLAIN makes us
interested in Knowledge-directed Artificial Intelligence Reasoning Over
Schemas (KAIROS) DARPA-SN-19-19 .

Our discussions have focused on:
StratML is our Schema start point  for reasoning, as in, the performance of
AIKR   inference
<https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/inferences>s is scoped
/ weighed by the declared strategy.
AIKR reasoning uses KRID identifiers and data (aka metadata) properties,
such as KR TYPE.
KR Types include Declarative and Imperative  (aka procedural).

 Carl

Chair AIKRCG
It was a pleasure to clarify


On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 7:37 AM Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com>
wrote:

> It is under Owen and Chris's leadership that we are making some progress
> towards
> adopting stratml for the AIKRCG 'strategy'
>
> In sum. what are we doing/planning to do as a group is going to be
> documented in the plan. and although we are still working  things out, as
> we do have moments of brilliance and outbursts of productivity we can put
> them down in this stratml plan on the stratnav app so that they ll be a
> record of that. should be useful. I apologize again for being very tired
> but 9 pm is very late for me. especially when I have had a full day incl
> other calls etc-
>
> a few notes below
>
>
> the plan being developed here
>> <https://www.stratnavapp.com/StratML/Part1/413d648b-bd36-418d-af74-e15b0cd8281d/Styled>.
>> if anyone is inspired to chip in pls ask editing pass to Chris on this list
>>
>
>
>> With reference to our Frameworks goal
>> <https://www.stratnavapp.com/StratML/Part1/413d648b-bd36-418d-af74-e15b0cd8281d/Styled#Goal_f1a62bb5-9910-4052-946a-344c0e22272f>,
>> I will endeavor to render in StratML Part 2 format any frameworks that may
>> be discovered and available on the Web.  Please apprise me of any of which
>> you are aware.
>>
> To clarify -  Jorge aske whether we are using any framework of reference
> for our work. which loosely attempts  to study explainability for machine
> learning. That particular goal for our CG may need to be refined a little -
> I dont think a frameworks exists as such (strategies, methods) but there is
> interesting work being done, which I dont think is a framework yet. rather
> a compilation of possible techniques. the effectiveness of which may need
> to be evaluated in the field. So to answer the question, methods to address
> explainability of ML exist but
> a) I dont think are frameworks/strategies - this may be our goal? to
> gather what is in the field and make a framework?
> b) evaluation criteria for the effectiveness of these methods may not yet
> be studied, again
> could this be our work? I am doing some research in this direction but not
> yet conclusive
>  I volunteered to take up this task and shall soon update the plan with
> some links but  I am putting together a presentation-
>  anyone want to contribute?
>
> The caveat is that  statistical pronability and non parametric methods in
> ML are  unpredictable by definition
> https://machinelearningmastery.com/uncertainty-in-machine-learning/
> http://mlg.eng.cam.ac.uk/zoubin/talks/mit12csail.pdf
>
> (this is not my field at all, does anyone care to expand?)
> so I am not sure how to address this unpredictability other than with the
> question
>
> Can we use known symbolilc KR to  explain ML?
>
> In the meantime, this Google site-specific query
>> <https://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=AI+framework&btnG=Google+Search&domains=stratml.us&sitesearch=stratml.us>
>> of the StratML collection turns up about 29 hits on the terms "AI
>> framework".  Here's <https://www.modzy.com/platform-and-marketplace/>
>> the top paid ad-placed hit (not yet in the StratML collection but soon to
>> be).
>>
> thanks -  how do we query for ML explainability framework (a bit more
> precise semantically in relation to what we are doing here)
>
> KRID -  Carl is putting forward a category/concept/type  whereby KR is
> identified
> so KRID = some value to describe KR identity
> Carl started by suggesting the top level distinction for this concept
> would be
> declarative/procedural
> i  do not yet have an opinion about this, but would request Carl to start
> sketching out
> the taxonomy for KRID as he envisions it. so that we can have a discussion
> about it
> One considertation is: to what extent is declarative/procedural knowledge
> relevant to support ML?  or is KRID intended for AI in general (not ML) .
> Carl perhaps you should create this as a goal for yourself.Also could you
> clarify the relation of KRID to KAIROS?
>
> Thanks!
>
> PDM
>