James Ratcliff wrote:
Richard,
What is your specific complaint about the 'viability of the framework'?
I was referring mainly to my "complex systems problem" (currently being
hashed to death on a parallel thread, and many times before).
Richard Loosemore
Ed,
This line of data gathering is very interesting to me as well, though
I found quickly that using all web sources quickly devolved into insanity.
By using scanned text novels, I was able to extract lots of relational
information on a range of topics.
With a well defined ontology system, and some human overview, a large
amount of information can be extracted and many probabilities learned.
James
*/Ed Porter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>/* wrote:
>RICHARD LOOSEMORE=====>
You are implicitly assuming a certain framework for solving the
problem of representing knowledge ... and then all your discussion
is about whether or not it is feasible to implement that framework
(to overcome various issues to do with searches that have to be done
within that framework).
But I am not challenging the implementation issues, I am challenging
the viability of the framework itself.
[snipped]
-----
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/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=73423342-cd44d9
