NARS 1.4.0 statement question

[Alexander]

Hello,

We have a this statement:
IN: (^believe,<Self --> ok>). %1.00;0.70% {0 : 1}
IN: (^believe,(--,<Self --> ok>)). %1.00;0.30% {0 : 2}
IN: (^believe,<Self --> ok>). %1.00;0.80% {0 : 3}
IN: (^believe,<Self --> ok>). %1.00;0.60% {0 : 4}
How can i specify inside-oriented statement to make judgment between
this statements. Finally i need to get (<Self --> ok>). %0.xx;0.xx%
with commulative freq/conf value of all statements.
Now i have a infinite loop.
Basically, i try to get work self-control system.

[Pei Wang]

Hi Alexander,

I didn't get the time to work on the code in the winter vacation (I'm working on something else), so the self-control in NARS won't be ready for testing soon.

As for your example, sentences like "(^believe,<Self --> ok>)." shouldn't appear as input. Instead, the input should be "<Self --> ok>.", and it is the system's own perceiving operation on this input that produces "(^believe,<Self --> ok>)" --- we cannot directly demand the system to believe something.

Furthermore, the evidence accumulation on "<Self --> ok>" will happen directly amount the judgments on this statement, like in the previous versions of NARS, without involving the ^believe operator.

By "infinite loop," I assume you mean from "<Self --> ok>" to "(^believe,<Self --> ok>)" to "(^believe, (^believe,<Self --> ok>)), " .... In logic, we human beings can also form such an inference chain to any length if needed (which rarely happens), though it won't be infinite, because the resources allocated to the result will decrease to zero very soon (unless there is strong motivation for it).

Pei

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "open-nars" group.
To post to this group, send email to open...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to open-nars+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/open-nars?hl=en.

[Alexander]

Hello Pei,
Thanks for fast response. Please see my comment in blue

2011/1/9 Pei Wang <mail.p...@gmail.com>

Hi Alexander,

I didn't get the time to work on the code in the winter vacation (I'm working on something else), so the self-control in NARS won't be ready for testing soon.

So, currently we do not have any mechanism to enable self-control and ^believe can appear only in input?

As for your example, sentences like "(^believe,<Self --> ok>)." shouldn't appear as input. Instead, the input should be "<Self --> ok>.", and it is the system's own perceiving operation on this input that produces "(^believe,<Self --> ok>)" --- we cannot directly demand the system to believe something.

Furthermore, the evidence accumulation on "<Self --> ok>" will happen directly amount the judgments on this statement, like in the previous versions of NARS, without involving the ^believe operator.

 

 

By "infinite loop," I assume you mean from "<Self --> ok>" to "(^believe,<Self --> ok>)" to "(^believe, (^believe,<Self --> ok>)), " .... In logic, we human beings can also form such an inference chain to any length if needed (which rarely happens), though it won't be infinite, because the resources allocated to the result will decrease to zero very soon (unless there is strong motivation for it).

If i understand your correct, i should specify also cycles for statement:
<Self-->ok>,

....

234

Is it possible to run full inference chain, i mean get concreate result.

 

Pei

On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 2:41 AM, Alexander <sanchis.no@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello,

We have a this statement:
 IN: (^believe,<Self --> ok>). %1.00;0.70% {0 : 1}
 IN: (^believe,(--,<Self --> ok>)). %1.00;0.30% {0 : 2}
 IN: (^believe,<Self --> ok>). %1.00;0.80% {0 : 3}
 IN: (^believe,<Self --> ok>). %1.00;0.60% {0 : 4}
How can i specify inside-oriented statement to make judgment between
this statements. Finally i need to get (<Self --> ok>). %0.xx;0.xx%
with commulative freq/conf value of all statements.
Now i have a infinite loop.
Basically, i try to get work self-control system.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "open-nars" group.
To post to this group, send email to open...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to open-nars+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/open-nars?hl=en.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "open-nars" group.
To post to this group, send email to open...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to open-nars+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/open-nars?hl=en.

--
Best regards,
Alexander

[Pei Wang]

On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Alexander <sanchis.no@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello Pei,
Thanks for fast response. Please see my comment in blue

2011/1/9 Pei Wang <mail.p...@gmail.com>

Hi Alexander,

I didn't get the time to work on the code in the winter vacation (I'm working on something else), so the self-control in NARS won't be ready for testing soon.

So, currently we do not have any mechanism to enable self-control and ^believe can appear only in input?

I'm afraid that is the case.

As for your example, sentences like "(^believe,<Self --> ok>)." shouldn't appear as input. Instead, the input should be "<Self --> ok>.", and it is the system's own perceiving operation on this input that produces "(^believe,<Self --> ok>)" --- we cannot directly demand the system to believe something.

Furthermore, the evidence accumulation on "<Self --> ok>" will happen directly amount the judgments on this statement, like in the previous versions of NARS, without involving the ^believe operator.

 

 

By "infinite loop," I assume you mean from "<Self --> ok>" to "(^believe,<Self --> ok>)" to "(^believe, (^believe,<Self --> ok>)), " .... In logic, we human beings can also form such an inference chain to any length if needed (which rarely happens), though it won't be infinite, because the resources allocated to the result will decrease to zero very soon (unless there is strong motivation for it).

If i understand your correct, i should specify also cycles for statement:
<Self-->ok>,

....

234

Is it possible to run full inference chain, i mean get concreate result.

"Yes" in NARS 1.3, but "No" in NARS 1.4 --- there are many loose ends to be tied up in the new version.

Pei