On 11/27/06, YKY (Yan King Yin) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The problem is that this thing, "on", is not definable in n-space via operations like AND, OR, NOT, etc. It seems that "on" is not definable by *any* hypersurface, so it cannot be learned by classifiers like feedforward neural networks or SVMs. You can define "apple on table" in n-space, which is the set of all configurations of apples on tables; but there is no way to define "X is on Y" as a hypervolume, and thus to make it learnable.
perhaps my view of a hypersurface is wrong, but wouldn't a subset of the dimensions associated with an object be the physical dimensions? (ok, virtual physical dimensions) Is "On" determined by a point of contact between two objects? (A is on B and B is on A) Or is there a dependancy on the direction of gravity? (A is on B, but B is on the floor) You say that "on" could not be learned - why not? In this case it would seem that the meaning would effectively be "cultural" and the meaning would depend on the semantic usage/intent of the tutors.. ----- This list is sponsored by AGIRI: http://www.agiri.org/email To unsubscribe or change your options, please go to: http://v2.listbox.com/member/?list_id=303
