Upload
presta
View
31
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
The Logic of Intelligence. Pei Wang Department of Computer and Information Sciences Temple University. Logic, Cognition, and AI. In general, “logic” is the study of valid reasoning , and reasoning plays an important role in cognition. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
The Logic of IntelligenceThe Logic of Intelligence
Pei WangDepartment of Computer and Information Sciences
Temple University
Artificial General Intelligence
MainstreamAItreats“Intelligence”asacollectionofproblem-specificanddomain-specificparts
ArtificialGeneralIntelligence(AGI)takes“Intelligence”asageneral-purposecapabilitythatshouldbetreatedasawhole
AGIresearchstillincludesdifferentresearchobjectivesandstrategies
Artificial Intelligence and Logic
“Intelligence”canbeunderstoodas“rationality”and“validity”---“dotherightthing”
Ingeneral,“logic”isthestudyofvalid reasoning,ortheregularityinthinking
Therefore,anAIsystemmaybebuiltaccordingtoalogic,byconvertingvariousthinkingprocessesintoreasoningprocesses
Reasoning System
Areasoningsystemtypicallyconsistsofthefollowingmajorcomponents:
aformallanguage asemantictheory asetofinferencerules amemorystructure acontrolmechanismThefirstthreeareusuallycalleda“logic”
Traditional Theories
Languageandinferencerules:first-orderpredicatecalculus
Semantics:modeltheory Memory:relationalorobject-orienteddatastructuresanddatabase
Inferencecontrol:theoryofcomputation(algorithm,computability,andcomputationalcomplexity)
Problems of Traditional Theories Uncertainty:fuzzy concepts, changing meanings
and truth values, plausible results, conflicting evidence, nondeterministic inference process, …
Semanticjustificationofnon-deductiveinference:induction, abduction, analogy,…
Counter-intuitiveresults:sorites paradox, implication paradox, confirmation paradox, Wason’s selection task,…
Computabilityandcomplexity:termination problem,combinatorial explosion,…
Proposed Solutions non-monotoniclogic paraconsistentlogic relevancelogic probabilisticlogic fuzzylogic inductivelogic temporallogic modallogic situationcalculus possibleworldtheory
mentallogic mentalmodel case-basedreasoning Bayesiannetwork neuralnetwork geneticalgorithm heuristicalgorithm learningalgorithm anytimealgorithm……
Common Root of the Problems
Thetraditionaltheoriesweredevelopedinthestudyofthefoundationofmathematics,whiletheproblemsappearoutsidemath
Thelogicofmathematicsmaybedifferentfromthelogicofcognition
Inmathematicalreasoning,theknowledgeandresourcesareassumedtobesufficient(withrespecttothetasks)
Different Types of Systems “Pure-axiomaticsystem”:thesystem’sknowledgeandresourcesareassumedtobesufficient
“Semi-axiomaticsystem”:certainaspects(butnotall)oftheknowledgeandresourcesareassumedtobesufficient
“Non-axiomaticsystem”:theknowledgeandresourcesofthesystemareassumedtobegenerallyinsufficient
NARS (Non-Axiomatic Reasoning System)
NARSusesaformallogic(language,semantics,inferencerules)andisimplementedinacomputersystem
NARSisfullybasedontheassumptionofinsufficientknowledgeandresources,inthesenseofbeingafinite,real time,open,andadaptivesystem
NARSisdifferentfromtraditionaltheoriesinallmajorcomponents
Inheritance Based Representation
S P : thereisaninheritance relationfromtermStotermP
S isa specializationof PP isageneralizationof S
Inheritanceisreflexiveandtransitive
bird animal
Extension and Intension
ForagiventermT,its extension TE={x|xT}its intension TI={x|T x}
TTE TI
Theorem:(S P) (SE PE) (PISI)
Therefore,“Inheritance”means“inheritanceofextension/intension”
Evidence
PositiveevidenceofS P:{x|x (SE
PE)(PI SI)}
NegativeevidenceofS P:{x | x (SE
–PE)(PI –SI)}
S P
Amountofevidence:positive: w+=|SE
PE |+|PI
SI |
negative: w–=|SE –PE|+|PI
–SI|
total: w = w++w–=|SE |+|PI
|
Truth Value
InNARS,thetruthvalueofastatementisapairofnumbers,andmeasurestheevidentialsupporttothestatement.
S P[f, c]S P [f,c] f:frequency,w+/w c:confidence,w/(w +1)
Experience-Grounded Semantics
Thetruthvalueofastatementisdefinedaccordingtocertain“idealizedexperience”,consistingofasetofbinaryinheritancestatements
Themeaningofatermisdefinedbyitsextensionandintension,accordingtocertain“idealizedexperience”
Someaningandtruth-valuechangesaccordingtothesystem’sexperience
Syllogistic Inference Rules
Atypicalsyllogisticinferenceruletakesapairofpremiseswithacommonterm,andproducesaconclusion
Thetruthvalueoftheconclusioniscalculatedbyatruth-valuefunction
Differentcombinationsofpremisestriggerdifferentrules(withdifferenttruth-valuefunctions)
To Design a Truth-value Function
1.TreatallinvolvedvariablesasBoolean(binary)variables
2.Foreachvaluecombinationinpremises,decidethevaluesinconclusion
3.BuildBooleanfunctionsamongthevariables4.Extendthefunctionstoreal-number:
not(x)=1–xand(x,y)=x*yor(x,y)=1–(1–x)*(1–y)
Deduction
birdanimal[1.00,0.90]robinbird[1.00,0.90]
robinanimal[1.00,0.81]
M P [f1, c1] S M [f2, c2] S P [f, c]
f = f1 * f2
c = c1 * c2 * f1 * f2
M
S P
Induction
swanbird[1.00,0.90]swanswimmer[1.00,0.90]
birdswimmer[1.00,0.45]
M P [f1, c1] M S [f2, c2] S P [f, c]
f = f1
c = f2 * c1 * c2 / (f2 * c1 * c2 + 1)
S
M
P
Abduction
seabirdswimmer[1.00,0.90]gullswimmer[1.00,0.90]gullseabird[1.00,0.45]
P M [f1, c1] S M [f2, c2] S P [f, c]
f = f2
c = f1 * c1 * c2 / (f1 * c1 * c2 + 1)
S
M
P
Revision
birdswimmer[1.00,0.62]birdswimmer[0.00,0.45]
birdswimmer[0.67,0.71]
S P [f1, c1] S P [f2, c2] S P [f, c]
f =f1 * c1 * (1 - c2) + f2 * c2 * (1 - c1)
c1 * (1 - c2) + c2 * (1 - c1)
c1 * (1 - c2) + c2 * (1 - c1)
c1 * (1 - c2) + c2 * (1 - c1) + (1 - c2) * (1 - c1)
c =
S P
Other Inference Rules
MP[f1,c1]SM[f2,c2]SP[f,c]
analogy
union
implication P M [f1, c1] S M [f2, c2](S P) M [f, c]
B C [f1, c1]A B [f2, c2] A C [f, c]
Other Relations and InheritanceAnarbitrarystatementR(a, b, c)canberewrittenasinheritancerelationswithcompoundterms:
(*,a, b, c)R“Therelationamonga, b, cisakindofR.”
a(/,R,_,b, c)“a issuchanx thatsatisfiesR(x, b, c).”
b(/,R,a,_,c)“b issuchanx thatsatisfiesR(a, x, c).”
c(/,R,a, b,_)“c issuchanx thatsatisfiesR(a, b, x).”
Memory as a Belief Network
bird
gull
swan
robinswimmer
crow
feathered_creature
[1.00, 0.90] [1.00, 0.90]
[0.0
0, 0
.90]
[1.00, 0.90]
[1.00, 0.90] [1.00, 0.90]
[1.00, 0.90]
[1.00, 0.90]Theknowledgeofthesystemisanetworkofbeliefsamongterms.Atermwithallofitsbeliefsisaconcept
Cbird
Inference TasksNARSacceptsseveraltypesofinferencetasks: Knowledgetobeabsorbed Questionstobeanswered GoalstobeachievedAtaskisstoredinthecorrespondingconceptsToprocesseachtaskmeanslettingitinteracts
withtheavailablebeliefsintheconceptThisprocessusuallygeneratesnewtasks,
beliefs,andconcepts,recursively
Inference Process
NARSrunsbyrepeatingthefollowingcycle:1. Chooseaconceptwithinthememory2. Chooseataskwithintheconcept3. Chooseabeliefwithintheconcept4. Useinferencerulestoproducenewtasks5. Returntheuseditemstomemory6. Addthenewtasksintothememoryand
provideananswerifavailable
Control Strategy
NARSmaintains priority distributionsamongdataitems,usesthemtomakechoice,andadjuststhemaftereachstep
Factorsinfluencepriority: qualityoftheitem usefulnessoftheiteminhistory relevanceoftheitemtothecurrentcontext
Architecture and Working Cycle
Design and ImplementationTheconceptualdesignofNARShasbeen
describedinaseriesofpublicationsMostpartsofthedesignhavebeen
implementedinseveralprototypes,andthecurrentversionisopensourceinJava
Workingexamplesexistasproofofconcept,andonlycoversingle-stepinferenceorshortinferenceprocesses
Theprojectison-going,thoughhasproducednovelandinterestingresults
Unified Solutions Thetruthvalueuniformlyrepresentsvariouskindsofuncertainty
Thetruthvaluedependsonbothpositiveandnegativeevidence
Thenon-deductiveinferencerulesisjustifiedaccordingtothesemantics
Themeaningofatermisdeterminedbyitsexperiencedrelationswithotherterms
Withsyllogisticrules,thepremisesandconclusionsmustbesemanticallyrelated
TheinferenceprocessesinNARSdoesnotfollowpredeterminedalgorithms
ConclusionsItispossibletobuildareasoningsystemthatadaptstoitsenvironment,andworkswithinsufficientknowledgeandresources
SuchasystemprovidesaunifiedsolutiontomanyproblemsinA(G)I
Thereisa logic of intelligence,thoughitisfundamentallydifferentfromthe logic of mathematics