Re: KR for Cogai/gentle reminder

Paola et Al

Thanks for engaging in the lively discussion about AI & KR.
I think we can all accept that as members of the AIKR CG .. it is implied
that AI KR is a specialization of AI.
Equally, it would be accepted that the members of Cognitive AI Community
Group consider KR to be a cognitive science.

Thus, using this type of reasoning,  can we all accept that AI  cognition
can be considered as an albeit -artificial  type of KR ?

enjoy

Carl Mattocks
CarlMattocks@WellnessIntelligence. Institute


It was a pleasure to clarify


On Wed, Nov 2, 2022 at 12:32 PM ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program <
metadataportals@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Sapienti sat:
>
>
> https://www.vice.com/en/article/y3pezm/scientists-increasingly-cant-explain-how-ai-works
>
> And industry and the general ignorant public doesn't care, which is a
> recipe for disaster.
>
>
> 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 Tuesday, November 1, 2022 at 11:15:22 AM AST, Gabriel Lopes <
> gabriellopes9102@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hello everyone!
>
> It is really amazing the opportunity to have discussions like these, where
> fundamental concepts world-wide used, even across generations of thinkers
> and specialist practitioners on related-fields, are dissected and analysed.
>
> Thank you, @Paola Di Maio <paoladimaio10@gmail.com> , for bringing your
> disruptive point of view, principally when the *Bible *of AI tells
> explicitly the opposite.
> And, +1 for the perception of *giftness* about the possibility of having
> books, such as Norvig, available online.
>
> If I got your point, *knowledge *becomes a super-entity of materialized
> and conceptual entities, such as circuits and deductions, while
> *representation* comes as the manifested form passible of human
> perceiving, discussion, and understanding, such as Diagrams, Words, and OWL
> classes.
>
> More or less somehow?
>
> So, being *AI* an object of human interpretability of *artificial *and
> *intelligence* concepts - what isn't 'natural' (was already there) and
> capacity of inferring, deducting, perceiving, and realizing, just to cite a
> few, respectively -, *KR*, as a super-entity of *concept* itself,
> intuitively becomes a superset of Artificial Intelligence, as the
> representation of knowledge would surpass our notions of what is artificial
> and intelligence.
>
> --
> Although, I would also partially agree with Adeel.
>
> I had used Norvig in AI classes about KR some years ago, and, even if he
> have used the new hype term, also due to cognition and psychology
> revolution in the 70s and 80s and boosted by Intellicorp at the time, the
> discussion about KR in the book is mostly related to logical relationships
> among concepts, terms, and knowledge.
>
> But, as Paola stated, things are changing all the time, and, with the
> virtual revolution in recent years, maybe our notion of Knowledge,
> representation, natural, artifficial, and intelligence itself, will maybe
> suffer some modifications...
>
> Well, in any case, I`m hoping to be here for the next few years to see how
> this super interesting discussion will evolve ;-)!!
>
> best regards,
>
> Em dom., 30 de out. de 2022 às 17:50, ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program <
> metadataportals@yahoo.com> escreveu:
>
> Thank you Adeel for pointing out that KR is a subset of AI. And not only
> computer scientists would agree but basically most computational linguists,
> mathematicians and philosophers too.
>
> 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 Saturday, October 29, 2022 at 09:19:39 PM AST, Paola Di Maio <
> paoladimaio10@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Adeel.
>
> Thank you for giving more info about your background
> I apologise, since many posts were exploratory about KR
> It is amazing how someone can be a graduate of CS and still learning about
> KR
> That CS curricula have considered KR as a separate topic is regrettable
>
> It is also well documented that KR is only taught in a limited way in
> traditional curricula
> A topic I already discussed and published about
>
> Brachman wrote  that AI and KR cannot be separated, must have been fifty
> years ago?
>  but AI field has evolved in a very funny way - resulting in current
> problems
> (also written and talked  about that extensively)
>
> KR however is a bigger topic beyond AI. The diagram shred yesterday
> makes it so clear (this is why is one of my favourite
>
>  I have already extensively posted about, and written on
> is that because AI is becoming now relevant to all other fields of
> practice (see the diagrams posted yesterday) KR needs to be designed
> accordingly
>  Finally, despite much talk of general intelligence of recent years
> the field of AI has developed in rather narrow ways,
>
> The work I do, and share here in snippets, is precisely taking into
> account he
> dynamic context where everything is going
>
> I apologize if I cannot reply to every posts,  especially where
> the questions and issues brought up have been extensively addressed
> in several years of posts publications and talks which I have done my best
> to share here
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 30, 2022 at 8:59 AM Adeel <aahmad1811@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Well, I come from CS background. I read those books 20 years ago. I am not
> a newbie! LOL
> And, AI is a sub-field of CS, while KRR is often considered a sub-field of
> AI.
> Literally, every CS department treats it as a separate research area
> within AI.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Adeel
>
> On Sun, 30 Oct 2022 at 01:54, Paola Di Maio <paoladimaio10@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Adeel,  it is really good that you are reading the books
> Norvig book is a great resource and the free copy online a gift to humanity
> But we must keep in mind that everything is relative
> Norvig point of view  on KR is relative to his field of practice
>
> Based on the diagram shared yesterday AI is one of the fields of
> application
> for KR,
>
> From a systems viewpoint, AI is a type of system
> If you place AI at the top of your conceptual hierarchy, everything will
> be a subset of it
> (including creativity, intelligence, knowledge etc)
> I think clarifying this top level category is fundamental. (was it you who
> brought up the THING in owl or someone else)
>
> This is why, we need to define our questions during dialogue.
> In my ontology, THING is knowledge
>
> I consider AI as a subset of KR because my top level category is general
> knowledge/cogniti. AI is a subset (a type of system based on ) natural
> intelligence
> It is regrettable that intelligent processes are  considered a subset of
> AI in CS literature
>
> PDM
>
> On Sun, Oct 30, 2022 at 8:40 AM Adeel <aahmad1811@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> No, that is not true. KR is a subset of AI.
>
> See Norvig book which is used in many foundational AI courses which
> teaches KR is a subset of AI.
>
> Norvig <https://zoo.cs.yale.edu/classes/cs470/materials/aima2010.pdf>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Adeel
>
> On Sun, 30 Oct 2022 at 01:33, Paola Di Maio <paoladimaio10@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Milton
> Please note that AI is a subset of KR  not viceversa
> Please also be reminded that I have often posted topics from other WC3
> lists
> where I spottend an overlap with KR (its all the archive)
> That said, if you would like to start by auditing all other CGs and WGs
> for KR
> relevant issues/problems that we could at least take into account here,
> that would be
> most welcome and most useful.
> If you do knowledge audit  for KR topic/open questions across W3C
> communities I will personally award you with a prize and even a plaque that
> you can hang on your wall
> Keeping in mind that things change all the time, you could limit by time
> frame
> (say in the last ten years or less?)
> PDM
>
> On Sun, Oct 30, 2022 at 2:57 AM ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program <
> metadataportals@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> I would like to point out that KR is one of the central themes for the
> entire field commonly known as artificial intelligence.
>
> What is a Knowledge Representation?
> A perspective from the MIT AI Lab, MIT AI Lab and Symbolics, Inc. and MIT
> Lab for Computer Science
> http://groups.csail.mit.edu/medg/people/psz/ftp/k-rep.html
>
> So what we are doing in the AIKR W3 CG is basically a SUBSET of every
> other AI CG in the W3 Community Groups
>
> Now a basic tenet of scientific dialogue is the possibility to disagree
> upon terminology, scope and findings, results and even theories.
>
> The biggest problem in AI today is that we cannot even agree upon what
> actually is AI, what it should be and what are its main characteristics,
> and unfortunately this also applies to knowledge representation.
>
> But because every field of scientific endeavor and engineering nowadays
> utilizes AI, and every field has its own knowledge that needs formal
> representation AIKR is at the core of all of this.
>
> I sense that the CogAI focuses of the cognitive processes involved in the
> creation of knowledge and how to best capture this in formal
> representation, based upon their description of objectives.
>
> So Paola is PARTIALLY right in trying to separate the work being done.
>
> But let's not waste the possible synergies to be gained. We could TOGETHER
> produce deliverables (reports, articles) and the central role of KR in AI,
> and how this relates to cognitive processes that are also central to all AI.
>
> Let's define this common ground and define the possible common objectives
> and potential deliverables. Because to quote the European Union, objectives
> for open, inclusive, explainable and ethical AI also presuppose open ,
> inclusive, explainable and ethical knowledge and consequently cognitive
> processes and underlying architectures for such.
>
> I have tasked myself with providing an overview of what is AI, using a
> timeline, with a concise summary of academic fields involved and how the EU
> objectives can be achieved.
>
> Anyone willing to collaborate is welcome to contact me.
>
> I have a vested personal interest to utilize AI for the common good
> defined in sustainable development guidelines of the UN as well, because AI
> could be instrumental in tackling seemingly insurmountable problems like
> climate change, and other global issues plaguing our modern world.
>
> Let's agree to be able to disagree, but not let it stand in our way to
> collaborate.
>
> 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, October 28, 2022 at 11:28:23 PM AST, Adeel <
> aahmad1811@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
>
> extract from the book:
>
> "
>
> Show that minimizing abnormality will work if we add the
>
> assertion
>
>
> *All Québecois are abnormal Canadians,*
>
> but will not work if we only add
>
>
>
> *Québecois are typically abnormal Canadians.*
>
> "
>
>
> That's harsh... LOL
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, 29 Oct 2022 at 03:32, Adeel <aahmad1811@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Perhaps, Paola is referring to the theory in this book -> Brachman and
> Levesque
> <https://www.cin.ufpe.br/~mtcfa/files/in1122/Knowledge%20Representation%20and%20Reasoning.pdf>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Adeel
>
> On Sat, 29 Oct 2022 at 03:06, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Noted.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_representation_and_reasoning
>
> In terms of knowledge representation, for humanity, my thoughts have been
> that it's about the ability for people to represent the evidence of a
> circumstance in a court of law.  If solutions fail to support the ability
> to be used in these circumstances, to successfully represent knowledge -
> which can be relied upon in a court of law; a circumstance that should
> never be wanted, but desirable to support peace.
>
> Then, I guess, I'd be confused about the purposeful definion; or the
> useful purpose of any such tools being produced & it's relationship, by
> design, to concepts like natural justice.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_justice
>
> Let me know if I am actually "off topic" per the intended design outcomes.
>
> Regards,
>
> Timothy Holborn.
>
> On Sat, 29 Oct 2022, 11:55 am Paola Di Maio, <paoladimaio10@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> Just as a reminder, this list is about sharing knowledge, research and
> practice in AI KR, The intersection with KR and CogAI may also be relevant
> here (and of interest to me)
>
> If people want to discuss CogAI not in relation to KR, please use the
> CogAI CG list?
> What I mean is that: if KR is not of interest/relevance to a post, then
> why post here?
>
> What is KR, its relevance and limitations is a vast topic, written about
> in many scholarly books, but also these books are not adequately covering
> the topic, In that sense, the topic of KR itself, without further
> qualification, is too vast to be discussed without narrowing it down to a
> specific problem/question
> KR in relation to CogAI has been the subject of study for many of us for
> many years, and it is difficult to discuss/comprehend/relate to for those
> who do not share the background. I do not think this list can fill the huge
> gap left by academia, however there are great books freely available online
> that give some introduction .
> When it comes to the application of KR to new prototypes, we need to
> understand what these prototypes are doing, why and how. Unfortunately NN
> fall short of general intelligence and intellegibility for humans.
>
> Adeel, thank you for sharing the paper 40 years of Cognitive Architectures
> I am not sure you were on the list back then, but I distributed the
> resource as a working reference for this list and anyone interested in
> February 2021, and have used the resource as the basis for my research on
> the intersection AI KR/CogAI since
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-aikr/2021Feb/0017.html
>
> Dave: the topics KR, AI, CogAI and consciousness, replicability,
> reliability, and all the issues brought up in the many posts in this thread
> and other thread are too vast
> to be discussed meaningfully in a single thread
>
> May I encourage the breaking down of topics/issues making sure the
> perspective and focus of KR (including its limitations) are not lost in
> the long threads
>
> Thank you
> (Chair hat on)
>
> On Fri, Oct 28, 2022 at 6:23 PM Adeel <aahmad1811@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> To start with might be useful to explore 'society of mind
> <http://aurellem.org/society-of-mind/index.html>' and 'soar' as point of
> extension.
>
> 40 years of cognitive architecture
> <https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10462-018-9646-y.pdf>
>
> Recently, Project Debater
> <https://research.ibm.com/interactive/project-debater/> also came into
> the scene. Although, not quite as rigorous in Cog or KR.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Adeel
>
> On Fri, 28 Oct 2022 at 02:05, Paola Di Maio <paoladimaio10@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Thank you all for contributing to the discussion
>
> the topic is too vast - Dave I am not worried if we aree or not agree, the
> universe is big enough
>
> To start with I am concerned whether we are talking about the same thing
> altogether. The expression human level intelligence is often used to
> describe tneural networks, but that is quite ridiculous comparison. If the
> neural network is supposed to mimic human level intelligence, then we
> should be able to ask; how many fingers do humans have?
> But this machine is not designed to answer questions, nor to have this
> level of knowledge about the human anatomy. A neural network is not AI in
> that sense
> it fetches some images and mixes them without any understanding of what
> they are
> and the process of what images it has used, why and what rationale was
> followed for the mixing is not even described, its probabilistic. go figure.
>
> Hay, I am not trying to diminish the greatness of the creative neural
> network, it is great work and it is great fun. But a) it si not an artist.
> it does not create something from scratch b) it is not intelligent really,
> honestly,. try to have a conversation with a nn
>
> This is what KR does: it helps us to understand what things are and how
> they work
> It also helps us to understand if something is passed for what it is not
> *(evaluation)
> This is is why even neural network require KR, because without it, we don
> know what it is supposed
> to do, why and how and whether it does what it is supposed to do
>
> they still have a role to play in some computation
>
> * DR Knowledge representation in neural networks is not transparent, *
> *PDM I d say that either is lacking or is completely random*
>
>
> DR Neural networks definitely capture knowledge as is evidenced by their
> capabilities, so I would disagree with you there.
>
>
> PDM  capturing knowledge is not knowledge representation, in AI,
> capturing knowledge is only one step, the categorization of knowledge is
> necessary to the reasoning
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *We are used to assessing human knowledge via examinations, and I don’t
> see why we can’t adapt this to assessing artificial minds *
> because assessments is very expensive, with varying degrees of
> effectiveness, require skills and a process -  may not be feasible when AI
> is embedded to test it/evaluate it
>
>
> We will develop the assessment framework as we evolve and depend upon AI
> systems. For instance, we would want to test a vision system to see if it
> can robustly perceive its target environment in a wide variety of
> conditions. We aren’t there yet for the vision systems in self-driving cars!
>
> Where I think we agree is that a level of transparency of reasoning is
> needed for systems that make decisions that we want to rely on.  Cognitive
> agents should be able to explain themselves in ways that make sense to
> their users, for instance, a self-driving car braked suddenly when it
> perceived a child to run out from behind a parked car.  We are less
> interested in the pixel processing involved, and more interested in whether
> the perception is robust, i.e. the car can reliably distinguish a real
> child from a piece of newspaper blowing across the road where the newspaper
> is showing a picture of a child.
>
> It would be a huge mistake to deploy AI when the assessment framework
> isn’t sufficiently mature.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Gabriel Lopes
> *Interoperability as Jam's sessions!*
> *Each system emanating the music that crosses itself, instrumentalizing
> scores and ranges...*
> *... of Resonance, vibrations, information, data, symbols, ..., Notes.*
>
> *How interoperable are we with the Music the World continuously offers to
> our senses?*
> *Maybe it depends on our foundations...?*
>