- From: <jos.deroo@agfa.com>
- Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2006 00:29:10 +0200
- To: connolly@w3.org
- Cc: inferenceweb@projects.semwebcentral.org, public-cwm-talk@w3.org, public-cwm-talk-request@w3.org
Dan Connolly wrote: > In the TAMI project, we've been working on getting proofs > from cwm converted to PML so that they can be displayed > in the inferenceweb browser. It seems to be working! > > For details, see > http://people.csail.mit.edu/lkagal/tami/ > > Cynthia and Li clarified how PML works and relaxed some > limitations in the InferenceWeb tools, and Lalana took > some conversion rules that TimBL started and I worked > on and produced > http://people.csail.mit.edu/lkagal/tami/cwm-pml.n3 > > Great work! indeed! > So http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/test/reason/to-pml.n3 is > perhaps obsolete now. I suppose things will move around > so they don't live in /lkagal/ so don't take these URIs > too seriously. > > But I think it's pretty interesting that the swap/cwm > tools and the InferenceWeb tools agree, in an observable > way, on how to represent a proof, at a certain level. > > Jos, I'm curious how the proof representation that euler > generates relates to http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/reason > and to PML. Any thoughts? My thought now is to do things as they are pending for so long :-) One concrete thing is that I will start this (long) weekend with recasting our latest euler5 prolog code to have the proof closer to http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/reason and is like tweaking the following piece of code % ============ % proof engine % ============ wh:- prefix(X,Y), write('@prefix '), write(X), write(' '), write(Y), write('.'), nl, fail; nl. w3:- flag('e:nope'), !, (step(X,case(Z)), wr(Z), write('.'), nl, fail; nl). w3:- step(X,case(Z)), feed(L), wr(L), write(' e:rpn3 ('), nl, wt(X), write('[ e:prove {'), wr(lf(X)), write(' => '), wr(lf(Z)), write('}]).'), nl, wr(Z), write('.'), nl, nl, fail; true. wt(','(Y,Z)):- step(X,Y), !, wt(X), write('[ e:imply {'), wr(lf(X)), write(' => '), wr(lf(Y)), write('}]'), nl, wt(Z). wt(','(ground(_),Z)):- !, wt(Z). wt(','(_=..[_,_,_],Z)):- !, wt(Z). wt(','(Y,Z)):- !, write('[ e:enter '), wr(lf(Y)), write(']'), nl, wt(Z). wt(Y):- step(X,Y), !, wt(X), write('[ e:imply {'), wr(lf(X)), write(' => '), wr(lf(Y)), write('}]'), nl. wt(ground(_)):- !. wt(_=..[_,_,_]):- !. wt(Y):- write('[ e:enter '), wr(lf(Y)), write(']'), nl. wr(X):- var(X), !, write('?'), write(X). wr(fpath(X,Y)):- !, wr(X), write('!'), wr(Y). wr(bpath(X,Y)):- !, wr(X), write('^'), wr(Y). wr(tlit(X,Y)):- !, wr(X), write('^^'), wr(Y). wr(lf(','(X,Y))):- !, write('{'), wr(X), wf(Y), write('}'). wr(lf(case(X))):- !, write('{'), wr(X), write('}'). wr(lf(X)):- !, write('{'), wr(X), write('}'). wr([]):- !, write('()'). wr([X|Y]):- !, write('('), wr(X), wl(Y), write(')'). wr(X):- functor(X,P,2), !, arg(1,X,S), arg(2,X,O), wr(S), write(' '), wr(P), write(' '), wr(O). wr(X):- write(X). wf(','(ground(_),Y)):- !, wf(Y). wf(','(_=..[_,_,_],Y)):- !, wf(Y). wf(','(X,Y)):- !, write('. '), wr(X), wf(Y). wf(ground(_)):- !. wf(_=..[_,_,_]):- !. wf(X):- write('. '), wr(X). wl([]):- !. wl([X|Y]):- write(' '), wr(X), wl(Y). %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% so that the actually produced http://eulersharp.sourceforge.net/2006/02swap/etc5.ref will be using http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/reason and stay running (also with all our other test cases..) > For reference, see: > TAMI project > http://dig.csail.mit.edu/TAMI/ Is very interesting and am reading http://www.w3.org/2006/01/tami-privacy-strategies-aaai.pdf > InferenceWeb > http://iw.stanford.edu/ > discussion: http://projects.semwebcentral.org/pipermail/inferenceweb/ > > cwm discussion: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-cwm-talk/ -- Jos De Roo, AGFA http://www.agfa.com/w3c/jdroo/
Received on Thursday, 1 June 2006 22:29:26 UTC