On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 7:55 PM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Cyc's DB is not publicly modifiable, but it's **huge** ... big enough that
its bulk would take others a really long time to replicate
A competent AGI should be able to absorb Cyc's knowledge, and I will
probably do so
Cyc's DB is not publicly modifiable, but it's **huge** ... big enough that
its bulk would take others a really long time to replicate
Why don't you find out if you can do anything interesting w/ Cyc's existing
**publicly available** DB, before setting about making your own. You may
find out,
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 4:10 AM, Abram Demski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
One way of going about it would be to let each person create their own
instance, which would have access to the global body of facts but
would be somewhat separate. This would prevent people from
contaminating the global
Maybe all we need is just a simple interface for entering facts...
YKY
I still don't understand why you think a simple interface for entering facts
is so important... Cyc has a great UI for entering facts, and used it to
enter millions of them already ... how far did it get them toward
On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 11:50 AM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I still don't understand why you think a simple interface for entering facts
is so important... Cyc has a great UI for entering facts, and used it to
enter millions of them already ... how far did it get them toward AGI???
Ben Goertzel wrote:
No, the mainstream method of extracting knowledge from text (other
than manually) is to ignore word order. In artificial languages,
you have to parse a sentence before you can understand it. In
natural language, you have to understand the sentence before
No, the mainstream method of extracting knowledge from text (other than
manually) is to ignore word order. In artificial languages, you have to
parse a sentence before you can understand it. In natural language, you have
to understand the sentence before you can parse it.
More exactly: in
--- On Tue, 9/30/08, YKY (Yan King Yin) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 6:43 AM, Ben Goertzel
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We are talking about 2 things:
1. Using an ad hoc parser to translate NL to logic
2. Using an AGI to parse NL
I'm not sure what you mean by parse
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 6:43 AM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We are talking about 2 things:
1. Using an ad hoc parser to translate NL to logic
2. Using an AGI to parse NL
I'm not sure what you mean by parse in step 2
Sorry, to put it more accurately:
#1 is using an ad hoc NLP
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 12:50 PM, Linas Vepstas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm planning to make the project opensource, but I want to have a web
site that keeps a record of contributors' contributions. So that's
taking some extra time.
Most wiki's automatically keep tracl of who made
what
On Tuesday 30 September 2008, YKY (Yan King Yin) wrote:
Yeah, and I'm designing a voting system of virtual credits for
working collaboratively on the project...
Write a plugin to cvs, svn, git, or some other.
- Bryan
http://heybryan.org/
Engineers:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 2:58 AM, YKY (Yan King Yin)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 6:43 AM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We are talking about 2 things:
1. Using an ad hoc parser to translate NL to logic
2. Using an AGI to parse NL
I'm not sure what you
Markov chains are one way of doing the math for spreading activation, but
e.g.
neural nets are another...
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:23 AM, Linas Vepstas [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
2008/9/29 Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Stephen,
Yes, I think your spreading-activation approach makes sense
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 2:43 PM, Lukasz Stafiniak [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 3:38 PM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Markov chains are one way of doing the math for spreading activation, but
e.g.
neural nets are another...
But these are related things,
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 4:10 AM, Abram Demski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How much will you focus on natural language? It sounds like you want
that to be fairly minimal at first. My opinion is that chatbot-type
programs are not such a bad place to start-- if only because it is
good publicity.
I
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 9:38 AM, Matt Mahoney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It seems to me the main limitation is that the language model has to be
described formally in Cycl, as a lexicon and rules for parsing and
disambiguation. There seems to be no mechanism for learning natural language
by
http://texai.org
3008 Oak Crest Ave.
Austin, Texas, USA 78704
512.791.7860
- Original Message
From: Matt Mahoney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2008 8:38:36 PM
Subject: Re: [agi] universal logical form for natural language
--- On Sun, 9/28/08
On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 5:23 PM, David Hart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually, It's been my hunch for some time that the richness and importance
of Hellen Keller's sensational environment is frequently grossly
underestimated. The sensations of a deaf/blind person still include
proprioception,
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 4:23 AM, YKY (Yan King Yin)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 4:10 AM, Abram Demski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
How much will you focus on natural language? It sounds like you want
that to be fairly minimal at first. My opinion is that chatbot-type
From: Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 8:18:30 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] universal logical form for natural language
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 4:23 AM, YKY (Yan King Yin) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 4:10 AM, Abram Demski [EMAIL
29, 2008 8:18:30 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] universal logical form for natural language
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 4:23 AM, YKY (Yan King Yin)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 4:10 AM, Abram Demski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
How much will you focus on natural language? It sounds
logical form for natural language
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Date: Sunday, September 28, 2008, 5:23 AM
On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 3:16 PM, YKY (Yan King Yin) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think I may be able to short-circuit the learning loop by using
minimal grounding. The Helen Keller argument =)
Actually
78704
512.791.7860
- Original Message
From: Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 8:18:30 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] universal logical form for natural language
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 4:23 AM, YKY (Yan King
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 5:23 AM, Mike Tintner [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
How does Stephen or YKY or anyone else propose to read between the lines?
And what are the basic world models, scripts, frames etc etc. that you
think sufficient to apply in understanding any set of texts, even a
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 9:18 PM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Parsing English sentences into sets of formal-logic relationships is not
extremely hard given current technology.
But the only feasible way to do it, without making AGI breakthroughs
first, is to accept that these
On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 1:51 AM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My point for YKY was (as you know) not that this is an impossible problem
but that it's a fairly deep AI problem which is not provided out-of-the-box
in any existing NLP toolkit. Solving disambiguation thoroughly is
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 6:28 PM, Lukasz Stafiniak [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 11:33 PM, Eric Burton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It uses something called MontyLingua. Does anyone know anything about
this? There's a site at
Thanks! Fascinating
On 9/29/08, Lukasz Stafiniak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 11:33 PM, Eric Burton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It uses something called MontyLingua. Does anyone know anything about
this? There's a site at http://web.media.mit.edu/~hugo/montylingua/
and it is
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 6:03 PM, YKY (Yan King Yin)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 9:18 PM, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Parsing English sentences into sets of formal-logic relationships is not
extremely hard given current technology.
But the only feasible
78704
512.791.7860
- Original Message
From: Mike Tintner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 2:23:34 PM
Subject: Re: [agi] universal logical form for natural language
Ben and Stephen,
AFAIK your focus - and the universal focus - in this debate
David,
Thanks for reply. Like so many other things, though, working out how we
understand texts is central to understanding GI - and something to be done
*now*. I've just started looking at it, but immediately I can see that what the
mind does - how it jumps around in time and space and POV
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-7933698775159827395ei=Z1rhSJz7CIvw-QHQyNkCq=nltkvt=lf
NLTK video ;O
On 9/29/08, Mike Tintner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David,
Thanks for reply. Like so many other things, though, working out how we
understand texts is central to understanding GI - and
Eric,
Thanks for link. Flipping through quickly, it still seemed sentence-based.
Here's an example of time flipping - fast-forwarding text - and the kind
of jumps that the mind can make
AGI Year One. AGI is one of the great technological challenges. We believe
we have the basic technology -
Extracting meaning from text requires context-sensitivity to do
correctly. Natural language parsers necessarily don't reason about
things. An AGI whose natural-language interface was abstracted via
some good parser could make suppositions about the constructs it
returned by interpreting them
*in an ,_,
On 9/29/08, Eric Burton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Extracting meaning from text requires context-sensitivity to do
correctly. Natural language parsers necessarily don't reason about
things. An AGI whose natural-language interface was abstracted via
some good parser could make
Cognitive linguistics also lacks a true deveopmental model of language
acquisition that goes beyond the first few years of life, and can embrace
all those several - and, I'm quite sure, absolutely necessary - stages of
mastering language and building a world picture.
Tomassello's theory of
://texai.org/blog
http://texai.org
3008 Oak Crest Ave.
Austin, Texas, USA 78704
512.791.7860
- Original Message
From: Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 8:18:30 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] universal logical form for natural language
On Mon
Ben,
Er, you seem to be confirming my point. Tomasello from Wiki is an early child
development psychologist. I want a model that keeps going to show the stages of
language acquistion from say 7-13, on through teens, and into the twenties -
that shows at what stages we understand
As I recall Tomassello's Constructing a Language deals with all the phases
of grammar learning including complex recursive phrase structure grammar...
But it doesn't trace language learning from the teens into the twenties,
no...
From a psychological point of view, that is an interesting topic,
512.791.7860
- Original Message
From: Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 8:18:30 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] universal logical form for natural language
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 4:23 AM, YKY (Yan King Yin)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 8:04:15 PM
Subject: Re: [agi] universal logical form for natural language
Stephen,
One thing worth commenting on here is what seems to be your
non-developmental concept of language acquisition.
The way humans
78704
512.791.7860
- Original Message
From: Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 8:18:30 AM
Subject: Re: [agi] universal logical form for natural language
On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 4:23 AM, YKY (Yan King Yin)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
My guess is that Schank and AI generally start from a technological POV,
conceiving of *particular* approaches to texts that they can implement,
rather than first attempting a *general* overview.
I can't speak for Schank, who was however working a long time ago when
cognitive science was
2008/9/29 YKY (Yan King Yin) [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I'm planning to make the project opensource, but I want to have a web
site that keeps a record of contributors' contributions. So that's
taking some extra time.
Most wiki's automatically keep tracl of who made
what changes, when.
*All* souce
2008/9/29 Stephen Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Ben gave the following examples that demonstrate the ambiguity of the
preposition with:
People eat food with forks
People eat food with friend[s]
People eat food with ketchup
[...]
how Texai would process Ben's examples. According to
2008/9/29 Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Stephen,
Yes, I think your spreading-activation approach makes sense and has plenty
of potential.
Our approach in OpenCog is actually pretty similar, given that our
importance-updating dynamics can be viewed as a nonstandard sort of
spreading
On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 1:22 PM, Eric Burton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The purpose of YKY's invocation of Helen Keller is interestingly at
odds with the usage that appears in the Jargon File.
In choosing Helen-Keller mode, I'm not deliberately trying to make
things harder for the baby AGI, it's
On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 3:22 PM, Eric Burton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.jargon.net/jargonfile/h/HelenKellermode.html
Thought that was funny, goodbye :)
Is there an entry for Anne Frank?
Trent
---
agi
Archives:
[Comment: Aren't logic and common sense *opposed*?]
Discursive [logical, propositional] Knowledge vs Practical [tacit] Knowledge
http://www.polis.leeds.ac.uk/assets/files/research/working-papers/wp24mcanulla.pdf
a) Knowledge: practical and discursive
Most, if not all understandings of
Having a vision-assisted training process would be extremely
compelling. Then the user can provide information relevant to
comprehending a scene as well as adding word/object associations.
Robust sight and sound processing are still kind of a frontier for
software, I think. A little good work in
YKY,
How much will you focus on natural language? It sounds like you want
that to be fairly minimal at first. My opinion is that chatbot-type
programs are not such a bad place to start-- if only because it is
good publicity.
I am imagining two ways of entering knowledge: (1) people talk to the
--- On Sun, 9/28/08, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FYI, Cyc has a natural language front end and a lot of folks have been
working on it for the last 5+ years...
It still needs work. I found this undated (2004 or later) white paper which is
apparently not linked from cyc.com.
Yes, the big weakness of the whole Cyc framework is learning. Their logic
engine seems to be pretty poor at incremental, experiential learning ... in
linguistics as in every other domain.
I don't think they have a workable approach to NL understanding or
generation ... I was just pointing out
--- On Sun, 9/28/08, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, the big weakness of the whole Cyc framework is learning. Their logic
engine seems to be pretty poor at incremental, experiential learning ... in
linguistics as in every other domain.
I don't think they have a workable approach to
On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 10:00 PM, Matt Mahoney [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- On Sun, 9/28/08, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, the big weakness of the whole Cyc framework is learning. Their logic
engine seems to be pretty poor at incremental, experiential learning ... in
]
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Sent: Sunday, September 28, 2008 8:38:36 PM
Subject: Re: [agi] universal logical form for natural language
--- On Sun, 9/28/08, Ben Goertzel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FYI, Cyc has a natural language front end and a lot of folks have been
working on it for the last 5+ years
Hi group,
I'm starting an AGI project called G_0 which is focused on commonsense
reasoning (my long-term goal is to become the world's leading expert
in common sense). I plan to use it to collect commonsense knowledge
and to learn commonsense reasoning rules.
One thing I need is a universal
Given that Cyc has accomplished far more in the logical encoding of
common sense than any other project, starting with OpenCyc and
building from there would seem to suggest itself as the obvious course
of action. Am I missing something?
On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 8:02 PM, YKY (Yan King Yin)
[EMAIL
Esperanto?
-- Matt Mahoney, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- On Sat, 9/27/08, YKY (Yan King Yin) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: YKY (Yan King Yin) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [agi] universal logical form for natural language
To: agi@v2.listbox.com
Date: Saturday, September 27, 2008, 3:02 PM
Hi group
Hi YKY,
Can you explain what is meant by collect commonsense knowledge?
Playing the friendly devil's advocate, I'd like to point out that Cyc seems
to have been spinning its wheels for 20 years, building a nice big database
of 'commonsense knowledge' but accomplishing no great leaps in AI. Cyc's
On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 5:21 AM, David Hart [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi YKY,
Can you explain what is meant by collect commonsense knowledge?
That means collecting facts and rules.
Example of a commonsense fact: apples are red
Example of a commonsense rule: if X is female X has an
The purpose of YKY's invocation of Helen Keller is interestingly at
odds with the usage that appears in the Jargon File.
Helen Keller mode /n./ 1. State of a hardware or software system that
is deaf, dumb, and blind, i.e., accepting no input and generating no
output, usually due to an infinite
IMO Cyc's problem is due to:
1. the lack of a well-developed probabilistic/fuzzy logic (thus
brittleness)
Cyc has local Bayes nets within their knowledge base...
2. the emphasis on ontology (plain facts) rather than production rules
While I agree that formulating knowledge in terms
63 matches
Mail list logo
