Re: the intersection between AIKR and COGAI

I beg to differ on KR is by definition symbolic. Is is slightly more complicated. Its is a question of signs, symbols, concepts and how to encode (assigned) meaning. And consequently the concept of languages is also slightly more complicated.
Chomsky, Saussure and Peirce basically define our current scope on linguistics, and semiotics therein, but we use artificial languages with symbols in mathematics, logic, physical sciences, computational linguistics, computer science and NLP.
The discussion here is more of a philosophical nature, but is essential. Because we intend AI to be open, inclusive and explainable, the KR must reflect this as well.

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 08:23:05 PM AST, Paola Di Maio <paoladimaio10@gmail.com> wrote:  
 
 Dave (and also partly Milton where you mention symbolic KR in a recent post)DR For instance, are you assuming that KR is symbolic? 

Sounds as if you may have not been reading  the posts here in the last few years
(ooops,?(  I am also becoming short in memory resources)
I have written extensively on this list, in publications and in lectures/presentations about how symbolic KR can be used to connect with other types of knowledgeKR is by definition symbolic (it uses language, notation, syntax)
Please search this list  for  symbolic, and postulate, and you will find the posts

If you have a question about what has been written/discussed in the postplease bring it up the reference (things may have been revised, improved, expandes since they were first posted)

P