> On 25 Jun 2019, at 18:22, Patrick J Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us> wrote: > > Most (all?) of the KR proposals put forward in AI or cognitive science work have been some subset of first-order predicate logic, using a variety of surface notations. There are some fairly deep results which suggest that any computably effective KR notation will not be /more/ expressive than FO logic. So FOL seems like a good ‘reference’ benchmark for KR expressivity. Hmm, I am not convinced and wonder if that is related to your notion of “computably effective”. There is a lot of interest in annotating relationships, e.g. for temporal, spatial, provenance and data quality considerations. Perhaps FOL is an attractive but ultimately misguided narrative? In the real world we need to deal with uncertainty, incompleteness and inconsistency. This suggests the value of rational belief based upon prior knowledge and past experience. Rational belief is imperfect, but the best we can adhere to in an imperfect world. Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> http://www.w3.org/People/Raggett W3C Data Activity Lead & W3C champion for the Web of things
Received on Tuesday, 25 June 2019 20:51:12 UTC