Hello!
The comments on this profile are unclaimed and thus are unverified.
Do they belong to you? Claim these comments.
chimezie
Is this you? Claim Profile »
1 year ago
in Annotation System Proposal on Thinking Clearly
Bijan, thanks for speaking out against Waterboarding and thanks for the link. I must say, I was completely ignorant of the reality of the technique, mostly because I find most political discourse too repugnant to engage in. Whenever you get to the bottom of certain talking points of politically conservative individuals, you often come across things such as this that make you shake your head and wonder what kind of world we live in. Furthermore it makes me feel ashamed to be a product of a society whose leaders can so swiftly leave such basic criteria of morality at their doorstep. It is as sickening as it is frightening. I'm sure you have read this article, but for the benefit of other readers who have been subject to the same silence that is media propaganda can get a decent read on the horrifying nature of this torture method.
-- Chimezie
-- Chimezie
2 years ago
in Witchly interlude: SPASSing out on Thinking Clearly
I'd be curious to see how a tableau proof compares to a resolution-based proof. "AI: A Modern Approach" has a nice unification heuristic [1] (in python as well) for a backward chaining algorithm which is similar to how prolog unifies and the basis for Deroo's euler-enhanced resolution mechanism for proof and backward chaining.
I've recently pondered hooking up the python RETE-UL [2] implementation I've been playing with a means to track a non-circular path through the RETE network as an alternative proof generation mechanism for large rulesets and factbases. I wonder if there is some metric for comparing the application of LP heuristics to DLP reasoning against (more traditional) resolution and tableux-based heuristics for the same KR.
Generated proofs, whether or not they are truely valuable, bring about a certain unmatchable satisfaction to a logician =)
[1] http://aima.cs.berkeley.edu/python/logic.html
[2] http://reports-archive.adm.cs.cmu.edu/anon/1995...
I've recently pondered hooking up the python RETE-UL [2] implementation I've been playing with a means to track a non-circular path through the RETE network as an alternative proof generation mechanism for large rulesets and factbases. I wonder if there is some metric for comparing the application of LP heuristics to DLP reasoning against (more traditional) resolution and tableux-based heuristics for the same KR.
Generated proofs, whether or not they are truely valuable, bring about a certain unmatchable satisfaction to a logician =)
[1] http://aima.cs.berkeley.edu/python/logic.html
[2] http://reports-archive.adm.cs.cmu.edu/anon/1995...
3 years ago
in Tagtriples + identity precision on Phil Dawes' Stuff
Perhaps an appropriate, and concrete subset of the SW and open systems should be outlined. A closed system (which controls the production of identification - by URI or any alternative means- as well as content), which does *not* automatically apply entailment rules (not even the 'simple' entailment rules as defined in RDF-MT) could be such a subset. Then finally, simplify the model to consist only of the following parts:
Graph
Context (or collection of statements)
Statement
Identifiers (URIs)
Literals
voila, you have RDF-Lite (clearly distinguished from the SW). Now the syntax for repsenting such a subset would also be much simpler, but an orthogonal issue to the underlying model.
Graph
Context (or collection of statements)
Statement
Identifiers (URIs)
Literals
voila, you have RDF-Lite (clearly distinguished from the SW). Now the syntax for repsenting such a subset would also be much simpler, but an orthogonal issue to the underlying model.
