a) render their plan(s) in StratML format, andb) collaborate with them to see if the algorithm(s) themselves can be reasonably documented in StratML format to make it(their) purposes and results comprehensible to human beings.
Carl & Paola, my wife and I were away last week for Thankgiving with family. We just got home this evening and I'm not sure I fully grasp this message thread.For example, I'm not sure exactly what this statement means: "Startpoint is the document produced during our meetings on 'Leveraging the StratML specification for AIKR'". I don't seem to have that document included in my collection at https://stratml.us/drybridge/index.htm#AIKRCGIf any of the members of the group are willing and able to come to consensus on a potential output that we might produce together, I will be more than happy to render the plan in StratML format and do my best to contribute to realizing any goals and objectives it may set forth.BTW, as per Paola's suggestion, I am addressing this reply only to the two of you. I'm getting the sense that it may be time for me to sign off the list but I'm not one to burn any bridges that may someday prove useful.On Wednesday, November 23, 2022 at 01:17:10 AM EST, Paola Di Maio <paolad...@gmail.com> wrote:Carl and allThanks for offering to organise a call- I somewhat glad to see that the overall mission for this AI KR CG is starting to sink in, :-)it may be good to hear how CG members tackle the challenge from their perspective (that may include stratml?)Please excuse me for probably not attending call at this stage, but look forward to learn about possible useful conversations you may hold if someone signs up for it. This area is very complexIn addition to the call, or as an alternative to the call, or both, may I suggest that you consider inviting interested members to contribute a paragraph (on a wiki) bya) defining the challenges/problems not yet met taking ito account the state of the art,which is vast and mysterious (this implying have a grasp of the SOTA which is a tough one, but every little bit helps)b) making a short statement of interest as how the member in question addresses/ solves such challenges, including pointers to relevant work such as papers, talks , publication or display of interest in the topicThis could help us gather the field without unnecessary expectation and maybe stimulate members to pull their act together-Keeping in mind the overall mission of a possible WG, can we every draft anything from W3C point of view based on what emerges?In fact, I would be inclined to invite to a call only members who have formulatedtheir expression of interest in an articulate form *ie, qualifying membersor something like thatcheersPOn Wed, Nov 23, 2022 at 2:52 AM carl mattocks <carlma...@gmail.com> wrote:Paola, Pete et alThanks for your comments and phrasing used in the modified call below..I invite everyone to indicate your level of interest in participating in a series of meetings :
- Objective is to determine how to Use KR to support Humans in the AI loop
- One task is to explain the challenges that Human in the Loop Knowledge Representation would address.
- Startpoint is the document produced during our meetings on 'Leveraging the StratML specification for AIKR'Happy ThanksgivingCarl MattocksIt was a pleasure to clarifyOn Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 9:20 PM Paola Di Maio <paola....@gmail.com> wrote:Carl, Human in the AI loop is a good idea,Human in the loop is very broad, what about being a touch more preciseUsing KR to support humans in the AI loop(maybe you can phrase it even better)The goals and content would have to be aligned to the titleStratML however useful is neither specific to AI or KRi have absolutely no problem with the fact that Owen translates every statementto stratML, however this list is not about stratml at allapparently some members are confused by the frequency of stratml postsand wonder if this list is about stratmlMay we suggest that Owen, when kindly and cheerfully makes a stratml page for everything that we discuss here, refrains from making each time a public announcement on the list about it, and just pings the statement owner ?Owen of course you are very welcome to continue to contribute to all discussions, but maybe we do not need to be informed everytime you make a stratml entry?what do you think? :-)I think there may be scope for using stratML to make explicit statements about AI, each AI could have a stratML like schema to declare what it does and how it does ithowever if I remember correctly you said you have no plan to modify stratML at the momentOn Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 4:28 AM Peter Rivett <pete....@federatedknowledge.com> wrote:Hi Carl,I don't know if it's a copy-and-paste error but I don't see how the title "KR for Human in the Loop" matches the objective which is about the somewhat legacy XML language StratML; which AFAIK is for strategic performance planning as opposed to AI, human involvement in AI, or knowledge representation except for the very narrow domain of knowledge of strategic plans.
Apologies for missing background from previous pre-COVID discussions, but I'm sure I won't be the only one: are there any archives or outputs?Maybe an explanation of the specific problem space related to Human in the Loop Knowledge Representation would help: for example the competency questions it's hoped to address.
Pete Rivett (pete....@federatedknowledge.com)Federated Knowledge, LLC (LEI 98450013F6D4AFE18E67)Schedule a meeting at https://calendly.com/rivettp
From: carl mattocks <carlma...@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2022 10:29 AM
To: Dave Raggett <d...@w3.org>; W3C AIKR CG <publi...@w3.org>
Cc: Stanislav Srednyak, Ph.D. <stanislav...@duke.edu>
Subject: KR for Human in the Loop": Two challenges related to KR..KR Folk
To Give a measure of Thanks at this time of Thanks Giving .. I invite members to show their level of interest in participating in a regular conference call to discuss "KR for Human in the Loop"
Objective is to continue defining how "StratML" helps explain AI KR. Specifically, before Covid, we had mapped out how "Human in Loop" was a significant factor in shaping use of AI KR .. But we had no "language" for that interaction.
It was a pleasure to clarify
On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 6:05 AM Dave Raggett <d...@w3.org> wrote:
If you want an natural language notation for math, you might be interested in EasyMath from work in the late nineties:
EzMath provides an easy to learn notation for embedding mathematical expressions in Web pages. The notation is inspired by how expressions are spoken aloud together with a few abbreviations for conciseness (e.g. x^y denotes x raised to the power y).See:
However, that is a million miles from work on AI agents like Minerva.
Minerva is a sophisticated deep learning based system. It starts from general purpose large language model (PaLM) and refines it with training against a mathematical dataset, producing impressive results.
However, the approach described in the paper (linked above) is limited to agents with a single purpose. For agents designed for general purposes, we need a more flexible approach. That is why I am proposing work on direct manipulation of latent semantics, along with mimicking the way that the brain separates different kinds of knowledge across different parts of the cortex. The idea is to combine intuitive (System 1) thinking with deliberative, analytic thinking (System 2). Minerva only supports the former.
On 21 Nov 2022, at 10:00, Paola Di Maio <paola....@gmail.com> wrote:
You and I are on different planets, and speak different languages :-)
So it seems. :-)
Dave Raggett <d...@w3.org>