- From: Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2022 13:09:37 +1000
- To: paoladimaio10@googlemail.com
- Cc: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>, public-aikr@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAM1Sok0awr-DzoEcbX5ro_B-Z+ZNnaA-xPSyY1QMckkcJW+bvA@mail.gmail.com>
as i have just noted - i am confused as to the intended - inferences - suggested by the original post, that i responded to... Perhaps, clarification is deserved. On Sat, 29 Oct 2022 at 13:04, Paola Di Maio <paola.dimaio@gmail.com> wrote: > David and all > I am aware the image was small, and hoped (assumed?) > that you were able to locate the source, pasted below > The image should be read in the context of the text in the PDF > I always use it in all of my talks on kr > > (Adeel and Tim - we may also need a FAQ if you are up for maintaining one > Just to say, that I started studying and researching the AIKR precisely > to > find answers - most often I had to dig into library resources and read > hundreds of papers and eventually became a scholar!) > > A General Knowledge Representation Model of Concepts > https://cdn.intechopen.com › pdfs › InTech-A_ge... > > <https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjxtI7yt4T7AhVKBN4KHVciAz8QFnoECA4QAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.intechopen.com%2Fpdfs%2F36656%2FInTech-A_general_knowledge_representation_model_of_concepts.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2AShfWOgQz8d2Z24l7Myss> > PDF > by C Ramirez · 2012 · Cited by 34 — *Model* of *Concepts*. *Carlos > Ramirez* and *Benjamin Valdes*. *Tec* of *Monterrey Campus Queretaro*, *DASL4LTD > Research Group*. *Mexico*. 1. Introduction. > 36 pages > > On Sat, Oct 29, 2022 at 10:50 AM David Booth <david@dbooth.org> wrote: > >> 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 03:10:28 UTC