Re: [opencog-dev] How can we express modalities in OpenCog?

52 views
Skip to first unread message

Linas Vepstas

unread,
Mar 14, 2017, 11:07:35 PM3/14/17
to opencog


On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 10:25 PM, Alex <alexand...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi!

There can be modalities (which are usually expressed as diamonds or boxes (operators) in modal logic):
DUTY_TO_PERFORM_ACTION(agent, action, time horizone) - agent should perform action within time horizon
BELIEF(agent, statement, time instant) - agent believes in statement at the time instant


Wasn't this discussed in some other thread, just recently?
EvaluationLinks are the standard way of representing knowledge in opencog. See wiki for that.

Also see wiki about how to represent beleifs .. there is some section there that discuses this, I don't recall where, or what it said.

We've had prior discussions on the mailing list about representing beleifs; but we only had a minimal discussion about reasoning over them.  This is one area that should be clearified, and if new PLN rules are needed to handle this, then now is a good time to figure that out.

--linas
 

Such modalities are important in robotics (e.g. AGI safety - what duties and permissions robots have) and in communication (modelling other agent believes, knowledge and reasoning styles).

Important point is, that by introducing modalities we also introduce additional axioms/meta-rules that connect modal statements (statements under modal operator) with the nonmodal statements and with the statements of other modalities (modal conversion). Example list of such metarules are available in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_logic. Such metarules sometimes are debatable, e.g. rule in deontic logic: DUTY_TO_PERORM_ACTION(agent, action)->PERMISSION_TO_PERFORM_ACTION(agent, action) and such metarules sometimes lead to paradoxes (classical deontic logic is full of them), nevertheless, such metarules expresses additional knowledge about reality. And such metarules can be mined and used for constraining inference process (inference control)!

I have two questions regarding expression of modalities in OpenCog?:
1) how we can express modalities in Scheme/atomspace? 
-- One solution is to introduce new link types. Is such introduction possible? Maybe OpenCog have GenericLink for which the user form derivation and for the derivation the user can define syntax (how many Nodes and of what Type are allowed in the new Link) and semantics (what processes are done, what is output and strenght values of the output)? I have not heard about such option;
-- Another solution is to use PredicateNode, e.g. belief can be expressed:
   PredicateNode "agent_believe"
      ConceptNode "Erving"
      ConceptNode "Door is open"
The question is - can be use other Node, Link, result of SatisfyingSetLink etc. in place of the literal "agent_believes"? Or we are bounded for using literal constants in the PredicateNode? If former is true, then the system is open for the arbitrary set of modalities and the system can generate new modalities!

2) how we can express metarules for modalities in OpenCog?:
My proposal is to use rules that accepts some patterns of predicates and that generates new predicates:
   rule_body(obligation_predicate_type_nodes)->rule_head(new_permission_predicate_type_nodes)
Again - the question is about flexibility of the system: is the system allows generation of new link types or new predicate then the system can mine/generate the relevant rules for the newly generate modalities!

Of course, I am studying literature, experimenting, thinking about this, but maybe someone also has thought about those questions and has already something done - it would be nice to hear thoughts, proposals and experience!

Thanks!

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "opencog" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to opencog+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to ope...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/f70e8da1-1147-41e9-8aa6-c2acbab14ce6%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Linas Vepstas

unread,
Mar 14, 2017, 11:10:48 PM3/14/17
to opencog
Here:

this page tells you about how to repesent the internal state of other speakers (this includes beleifs, demands, ettc.)
---linas

Ben Goertzel

unread,
Mar 14, 2017, 11:14:35 PM3/14/17
to opencog
Code and theory for extending PLN to handle modal reasoning regarding
beliefs, knowledge and so forth is here:

https://github.com/sumitsourabh/opencog/tree/patch-1/opencog/reasoning/pln/rules/epistemic-reasoning

This was carefully worked out by Sumit Sourabh and Matt Ikle' a few years ago.

The code needs to be merged into the current version of PLN. This
would be a useful thing for someone to do, and then write associated
unit tests.

-- Ben


On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 11:07 AM, Linas Vepstas <linasv...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> email to opencog+u...@googlegroups.com.
>> To post to this group, send email to ope...@googlegroups.com.
>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/f70e8da1-1147-41e9-8aa6-c2acbab14ce6%40googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "opencog" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to opencog+u...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to ope...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAHrUA36r01Q%3DKbXsJE3%2BS2KbpfQ3oZ5WD%2B-XY_dfPP6PCPhdEw%40mail.gmail.com.
>
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



--
Ben Goertzel, PhD
http://goertzel.org

“Our first mothers and fathers … were endowed with intelligence; they
saw and instantly they could see far … they succeeded in knowing all
that there is in the world. When they looked, instantly they saw all
around them, and they contemplated in turn the arch of heaven and the
round face of the earth. … Great was their wisdom …. They were able to
know all....

But the Creator and the Maker did not hear this with pleasure. … ‘Are
they not by nature simple creatures of our making? Must they also be
gods? … What if they do not reproduce and multiply?’

Then the Heart of Heaven blew mist into their eyes, which clouded
their sight as when a mirror is breathed upon. Their eyes were covered
and they could see only what was close, only that was clear to them.”

— Popol Vuh (holy book of the ancient Mayas)

Linas Vepstas

unread,
Mar 14, 2017, 11:36:45 PM3/14/17
to opencog
I just skimmed that code, and it does not seem to make use of the KR structures described in http://wiki.opencog.org/w/Claims_and_context  and instead invents new link types .. e.g. BeliefLink.  This leads to a proliferation: you'd need BeliefLink, SayLink, TellLink,UseToBeleiveInThePastLink, LieLink etc.  So its not just a port, but a fairly serious restructuring.

--linas


>> To post to this group, send email to ope...@googlegroups.com.
>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/f70e8da1-1147-41e9-8aa6-c2acbab14ce6%40googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "opencog" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an

> To post to this group, send email to ope...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAHrUA36r01Q%3DKbXsJE3%2BS2KbpfQ3oZ5WD%2B-XY_dfPP6PCPhdEw%40mail.gmail.com.
>
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



--
Ben Goertzel, PhD
http://goertzel.org

“Our first mothers and fathers … were endowed with intelligence; they
saw and instantly they could see far … they succeeded in knowing all
that there is in the world. When they looked, instantly they saw all
around them, and they contemplated in turn the arch of heaven and the
round face of the earth. … Great was their wisdom …. They were able to
know all....

But the Creator and the Maker did not hear this with pleasure. … ‘Are
they not by nature simple creatures of our making? Must they also be
gods? … What if they do not reproduce and multiply?’

Then the Heart of Heaven blew mist into their eyes, which clouded
their sight as when a mirror is breathed upon. Their eyes were covered
and they could see only what was close, only that was clear to them.”

— Popol Vuh (holy book of the ancient Mayas)
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "opencog" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to opencog+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to ope...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CACYTDBdLatMo%2BSErmaU6g2An1YfiqmNcPBN_ru-MNcFwxxY6Eg%40mail.gmail.com.

Ben Goertzel

unread,
Mar 14, 2017, 11:40:58 PM3/14/17
to opencog
Hmm, OK, it's been a while since that work was done and almost as long
since I looked at it

The crux of Sumit's work was to modify the PLN truth value formulas to
work sensibly for these modal-logic operators (belief, etc.). That
part was solid and I remember it. But the choice of link types he
used, I don't remember well and would need to revisit... probably
you're right that it needs revisiting...
>> >> email to opencog+u...@googlegroups.com.
>> >> To post to this group, send email to ope...@googlegroups.com.
>> >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
>> >> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> >>
>> >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/f70e8da1-1147-41e9-8aa6-c2acbab14ce6%40googlegroups.com.
>> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> > Groups
>> > "opencog" group.
>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>> > an
>> > email to opencog+u...@googlegroups.com.
>> email to opencog+u...@googlegroups.com.
>> To post to this group, send email to ope...@googlegroups.com.
>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CACYTDBdLatMo%2BSErmaU6g2An1YfiqmNcPBN_ru-MNcFwxxY6Eg%40mail.gmail.com.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "opencog" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to opencog+u...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to ope...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAHrUA34BEp9WsoTMMw44nT-%3DCv%2BQE1i9%3D2bRg-NvSmEsekzy1g%40mail.gmail.com.

Linas Vepstas

unread,
Mar 14, 2017, 11:46:17 PM3/14/17
to opencog
I  updated the wiki page to mention it, and also mention that a BeliefLink is the same as EvaluationLink Predicate "belief".   Not only would a port into the current PLN infratructure be useful, but that should be followed by a tutorial/example, and there should also be a hookup into the chatbot. That would ... make for a fun demo.



>> >> To post to this group, send email to ope...@googlegroups.com.
>> >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
>> >> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> >>
>> >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/f70e8da1-1147-41e9-8aa6-c2acbab14ce6%40googlegroups.com.
>> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> > Groups
>> > "opencog" group.
>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>> > an

>> To post to this group, send email to ope...@googlegroups.com.
>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CACYTDBdLatMo%2BSErmaU6g2An1YfiqmNcPBN_ru-MNcFwxxY6Eg%40mail.gmail.com.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "opencog" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an

> To post to this group, send email to ope...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAHrUA34BEp9WsoTMMw44nT-%3DCv%2BQE1i9%3D2bRg-NvSmEsekzy1g%40mail.gmail.com.
>
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



--
Ben Goertzel, PhD
http://goertzel.org

“Our first mothers and fathers … were endowed with intelligence; they
saw and instantly they could see far … they succeeded in knowing all
that there is in the world. When they looked, instantly they saw all
around them, and they contemplated in turn the arch of heaven and the
round face of the earth. … Great was their wisdom …. They were able to
know all....

But the Creator and the Maker did not hear this with pleasure. … ‘Are
they not by nature simple creatures of our making? Must they also be
gods? … What if they do not reproduce and multiply?’

Then the Heart of Heaven blew mist into their eyes, which clouded
their sight as when a mirror is breathed upon. Their eyes were covered
and they could see only what was close, only that was clear to them.”

— Popol Vuh (holy book of the ancient Mayas)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "opencog" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to opencog+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to ope...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CACYTDBevfrcxtXTr3XkPHL5P9OaG2Jnrc5-oKyJXJ8CBTn0i%2Bg%40mail.gmail.com.

Ben Goertzel

unread,
Mar 14, 2017, 11:47:54 PM3/14/17
to opencog
I guess the argument for having a link type "BeliefLink" is that Sumit
created specific quantitative truth value formulas to deal with
BeliefLink .... Of course these formulas could also be used together
with "PredicateNode 'belief' " as well, but so far typically when we
have specific math formulas for manipulating the parameters of a
certain predicate, we've made it a link type...

ben

On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 11:45 AM, Linas Vepstas <linasv...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I updated the wiki page to mention it, and also mention that a BeliefLink
>> >> >> email to opencog+u...@googlegroups.com.
>> >> >> To post to this group, send email to ope...@googlegroups.com.
>> >> >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
>> >> >> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/f70e8da1-1147-41e9-8aa6-c2acbab14ce6%40googlegroups.com.
>> >> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> >> > Groups
>> >> > "opencog" group.
>> >> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>> >> > send
>> >> > an
>> >> > email to opencog+u...@googlegroups.com.
>> >> email to opencog+u...@googlegroups.com.
>> >> To post to this group, send email to ope...@googlegroups.com.
>> >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
>> >> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> >>
>> >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CACYTDBdLatMo%2BSErmaU6g2An1YfiqmNcPBN_ru-MNcFwxxY6Eg%40mail.gmail.com.
>> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> > Groups
>> > "opencog" group.
>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>> > an
>> > email to opencog+u...@googlegroups.com.
>> email to opencog+u...@googlegroups.com.
>> To post to this group, send email to ope...@googlegroups.com.
>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CACYTDBevfrcxtXTr3XkPHL5P9OaG2Jnrc5-oKyJXJ8CBTn0i%2Bg%40mail.gmail.com.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "opencog" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to opencog+u...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to ope...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CAHrUA35e5m6yo6iSXsYLEBaLB5NJOEb6b02%2B57XxLJbkZ3BweQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Linas Vepstas

unread,
Mar 14, 2017, 11:55:40 PM3/14/17
to opencog
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 11:47 AM, Ben Goertzel <b...@goertzel.org> wrote:
I guess the argument for having a link type "BeliefLink" is that Sumit
created specific quantitative truth value formulas to deal with
BeliefLink ....   Of course these formulas could also be used together
with "PredicateNode 'belief' " as well, but so far typically when we
have specific math formulas for manipulating the parameters of a
certain predicate, we've made it a link type...

Well, but the very first example on the wiki page is "I tell you that small dogs can fly" which is not the same as "I believe that small dogs can fly"...

This promptly goes down a rabbit-hole of a theory of mind:  "I believe that Ben thinks that small dogs can fly"  or more likely: "I believe that Ben was joking when he said that small dogs can fly".

And then there is premonition, because that wiki page was written before Pumpkin jumped out the window of the moving car and broker her leg...

--linas

 

>> >> >> To post to this group, send email to ope...@googlegroups.com.
>> >> >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
>> >> >> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/f70e8da1-1147-41e9-8aa6-c2acbab14ce6%40googlegroups.com.
>> >> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --
>> >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> >> > Groups
>> >> > "opencog" group.
>> >> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>> >> > send
>> >> > an

>> >> To post to this group, send email to ope...@googlegroups.com.
>> >> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
>> >> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> >>
>> >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CACYTDBdLatMo%2BSErmaU6g2An1YfiqmNcPBN_ru-MNcFwxxY6Eg%40mail.gmail.com.
>> >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> > Groups
>> > "opencog" group.
>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>> > an

>> To post to this group, send email to ope...@googlegroups.com.
>> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CACYTDBevfrcxtXTr3XkPHL5P9OaG2Jnrc5-oKyJXJ8CBTn0i%2Bg%40mail.gmail.com.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "opencog" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an

> To post to this group, send email to ope...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
>
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.



--
Ben Goertzel, PhD
http://goertzel.org

“Our first mothers and fathers … were endowed with intelligence; they
saw and instantly they could see far … they succeeded in knowing all
that there is in the world. When they looked, instantly they saw all
around them, and they contemplated in turn the arch of heaven and the
round face of the earth. … Great was their wisdom …. They were able to
know all....

But the Creator and the Maker did not hear this with pleasure. … ‘Are
they not by nature simple creatures of our making? Must they also be
gods? … What if they do not reproduce and multiply?’

Then the Heart of Heaven blew mist into their eyes, which clouded
their sight as when a mirror is breathed upon. Their eyes were covered
and they could see only what was close, only that was clear to them.”

— Popol Vuh (holy book of the ancient Mayas)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "opencog" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to opencog+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to ope...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.

Ben Goertzel

unread,
Mar 15, 2017, 12:02:57 AM3/15/17
to opencog
> Well, but the very first example on the wiki page is "I tell you that small
> dogs can fly" which is not the same as "I believe that small dogs can
> fly"...
>
> This promptly goes down a rabbit-hole of a theory of mind: "I believe that
> Ben thinks that small dogs can fly" or more likely: "I believe that Ben was
> joking when he said that small dogs can fly".

Well it may be a rabbit hole. But what Sumit did was figure out some
sensible truth value formulas for the particular case of "belief" ...

https://github.com/sumitsourabh/opencog/blob/patch-1/opencog/reasoning/pln/rules/epistemic-reasoning/theory/gsoc_theory.tex

> And then there is premonition, because that wiki page was written before
> Pumpkin jumped out the window of the moving car and broker her leg...
>

I *believe* that was Dali not Pumpkin ;p ;) ...

Linas Vepstas

unread,
Mar 15, 2017, 1:55:01 AM3/15/17
to opencog, Amen Belayneh, Leung Man Hin
Well, not to pointlessly prolong the discussion, but ...

Theory-of-mind is not that different than theory-of-world.  Although I believed that it was Pumpkin that jumped out the car window, I now have to revise my beliefs based on new evidence.

So, I start with a statement about objective reality: a statement concerning small dogs that fly out of car windows, and I transform it into a "controller"  -- a verb-action -- that updates my personal model of the external world. See where I am going with this?

My model of the external world is some set of EvaluationLinks asserting "facts" that I "know to be true". Except that they are actually just my (personal) beliefs about the external world.

When I hear a new sentence: "It was Dali", I have to revise my belief network. I parse this sentence, and eventually turn it into a "controller" or "action", and use that "action" to update my belief network about flying dogs.

Did that update-action have to go through the action-selection stage?  You might think that such actions are always on, always happen.   But perhaps I am very sleepy, or tired or cranky/angry, and my action-selector decides NOT to update my belief network about flying dogs.

It's even more complex: when that controller runs and updates my beliefs about flying dogs, I may then also play the smile animation, or the roll-your-eyes animation, or the sit-up-in-bed-in-the-middle-of-the-night-and-smack-forehead animation.

See?  This is why I keep wanting to talk about "world models" and "controllers" -- its all a form of belief revision.  Right now, I don't really much care about whether or not the formulas for updating the truth values are mathematically correct or not, based on probabilistic modal logic. What I really really *do* care about is that We pick the correct representation from the three styles listed on the wiki page, and that we correctly design controllers that can correctly update these belief structures.  If the representation is bad, and the controllers are flawed, then we cannot construct any beliefs from our sensory inputs.

The only way out of this mess that I see is to continue to try to build some KR system that converts English sentences into action-psi-rules and updates the KR structures, and performs actions, and answers questions, and see what happens. Then step back and look at the architecture, and see if its fucked up or not, see if we can fix it.

What we cannot do is build little pieces that are disconnected from the chatbot: its great that we know have some modal-logic-with-correct-formuals code, but its disconnected from the "reality" of a working, demo-able chatbot.

--linas



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "opencog" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to opencog+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to ope...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/opencog.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/opencog/CACYTDBdNrRYgtX%2B9094WxMAbGA-KPZn46hMftMXmRUKw%2B9yVHA%40mail.gmail.com.

Ben Goertzel

unread,
Mar 15, 2017, 2:16:28 AM3/15/17
to opencog, Amen Belayneh, Leung Man Hin
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Linas Vepstas <linasv...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What we cannot do is build little pieces that are disconnected from the
> chatbot: its great that we know have some modal-logic-with-correct-formuals
> code, but its disconnected from the "reality" of a working, demo-able
> chatbot.


Yah, that is pretty much why we haven't integrated that code yet!

From the standpoint of the robotics application of OpenCog: Once we
are doing more basic PLN inferences regarding robot perceptions and
actions and goals, then it will make sense to extend the scope of our
inference to include inferences regarding beliefs, and at that point
integrating Sumit's code (possibly with some tweaks) will become high
priority...

Sumit did that for a GSoC project a couple years ago, with Matt Ikle's
close supervision, and the code has been kinda sitting there waiting
for us to pressingly need it

For the application of PLN to bio-AI, we don't really need to reason
about beliefs explicitly. For the robot application we will, we're
just not quite there yet...

-- Ben
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages