Re: the intersection between AIKR and COGAI

I don’t understand what you are trying to say.  Knowledge can be expressed symbolically as with RDF and Predicate Calculus, or in a distributed way when using vectors in noisy high dimensional spaces, as is the case with neural networks, both artificial and biological. Stable Diffusion knows the human faces have two eyes, two ears and one nose, as well as the variations in their shapes.  It isn’t using symbols, though, despite knowing the differences between humans, dogs and cats. Whilst it recognises the word “dog”, it does so by mapping it to a vector space for a latent representation of meaning, avoiding symbols.  Reasoning can likewise be implemented in vector spaces without resorting to symbols. Human languages uses words, which can be thought of as symbols, but the closer you look at them, the fuzzier they are, as the meaning is context dependent and hard to pin down.

> On 30 Oct 2022, at 20:41, ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program <metadataportals@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> 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.I don’t 

Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>