- From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
- Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2022 22:49:30 -0400
- To: public-aikr@w3.org
Hi Paula, That embedded image made me curious, but it came through so small that the annotations are completely illegible. Can you please re-send it as an attachment, and larger? Thanks! David On 10/28/22 22:40, Paola Di Maio wrote: > Hay Timothy and all > > This list is about KR in AI > > Your question is pertinent, but it has been answered in literature many > many years ago > image.png > From A General Knowledge Representation > Model of ConceptsCarlos Ramirez and Benjamin Valdes > Tec of Monterrey Campus Queretaro, DASL4LTD Research Group > Mexico > > I personally start every talk and paper on AI KR precisely with this > diagram, which serves to provide context (from Ramirez Valdez) > file:///C:/Users/paola/Downloads/InTech-A_general_knowledge_representation_model_of_concepts.pdf > > > KR is a big topic and it applies to many disciplines > In AI, KR has a specific function /roles (as discussed in many books > that it would be advisable to take sight of, since they answer many > questions being raised here) > KR has limitations, so does ML > In my research, I identify novel roles for KR, that is, for example to > expose deepfakes, > and other things I cannot explain in a post (but that I can try to > summarise in a webinar) > > What may be useful is to provide an reading list for people to > familiarise themselves with the notions being discussed and problems > being tackled > I started one on the AI KR CG home page somewhere, needs updating > > I do teach a course that I may be able to offer as a MOOC in the future > :-) > > Adeel, YES Brachman and Levesque, but so many others > > Adeel and Timothy, if you are interested, please contribute to the list > of resources > already started on the CG pages somewhere, you can also add references > and your own annotations > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2022 at 10:06 AM Timothy Holborn > <timothy.holborn@gmail.com <mailto:timothy.holborn@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Noted. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_representation_and_reasoning > <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 > <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 <mailto: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 <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 > <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto:dsr@w3.org>> > > >
Received on Saturday, 29 October 2022 02:49:43 UTC