Knowledge Representation Chapter 4. 2 What is KR? R. Davis, H. Schrobe, P. Szolovits (1993): 1.A...
-
Upload
gyles-norman -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
2
Transcript of Knowledge Representation Chapter 4. 2 What is KR? R. Davis, H. Schrobe, P. Szolovits (1993): 1.A...
![Page 1: Knowledge Representation Chapter 4. 2 What is KR? R. Davis, H. Schrobe, P. Szolovits (1993): 1.A surrogate 2.A set of ontological commitments 3.A fragmentary.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc45503460f9498df03/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Knowledge Representation
Chapter 4
![Page 2: Knowledge Representation Chapter 4. 2 What is KR? R. Davis, H. Schrobe, P. Szolovits (1993): 1.A surrogate 2.A set of ontological commitments 3.A fragmentary.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc45503460f9498df03/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
What is KR?
R. Davis, H. Schrobe, P. Szolovits (1993):
1. A surrogate
2. A set of ontological commitments
3. A fragmentary theory of intelligent reasoning
4. A medium for efficient computation
5. A medium of human expressions
![Page 3: Knowledge Representation Chapter 4. 2 What is KR? R. Davis, H. Schrobe, P. Szolovits (1993): 1.A surrogate 2.A set of ontological commitments 3.A fragmentary.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc45503460f9498df03/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3
Representation and Mapping
• Facts: things we want to represent.
• Representations of facts: things we can manipulate.
![Page 4: Knowledge Representation Chapter 4. 2 What is KR? R. Davis, H. Schrobe, P. Szolovits (1993): 1.A surrogate 2.A set of ontological commitments 3.A fragmentary.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc45503460f9498df03/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
4
Representation and Mapping
FactsInternal
Representations
English Representations
reasoning programs
English understanding
English generation
![Page 5: Knowledge Representation Chapter 4. 2 What is KR? R. Davis, H. Schrobe, P. Szolovits (1993): 1.A surrogate 2.A set of ontological commitments 3.A fragmentary.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc45503460f9498df03/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
5
Representation and Mapping
Initialfacts
Internal representationsof initial facts
desired real reasoning
forward representation mapping
Finalfacts
Internal representations
of final facts
backward representation mapping
operation of program
![Page 6: Knowledge Representation Chapter 4. 2 What is KR? R. Davis, H. Schrobe, P. Szolovits (1993): 1.A surrogate 2.A set of ontological commitments 3.A fragmentary.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc45503460f9498df03/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
6
Representation and Mapping
• Spot is a dog
• Every dog has a tail
Spot has a tail
![Page 7: Knowledge Representation Chapter 4. 2 What is KR? R. Davis, H. Schrobe, P. Szolovits (1993): 1.A surrogate 2.A set of ontological commitments 3.A fragmentary.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc45503460f9498df03/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
7
Representation and Mapping
• Spot is a dog
dog(Spot)
• Every dog has a tail
x: dog(x) hastail(x)
hastail(Spot)
Spot has a tail
![Page 8: Knowledge Representation Chapter 4. 2 What is KR? R. Davis, H. Schrobe, P. Szolovits (1993): 1.A surrogate 2.A set of ontological commitments 3.A fragmentary.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc45503460f9498df03/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
Representation and Mapping
• Fact-representation mapping is not one-to-one.
• Good representation can make a reasoning program trivial.
![Page 9: Knowledge Representation Chapter 4. 2 What is KR? R. Davis, H. Schrobe, P. Szolovits (1993): 1.A surrogate 2.A set of ontological commitments 3.A fragmentary.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc45503460f9498df03/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
9
Representation and Mapping
The Multilated Checkerboard Problem
“Consider a normal checker board from which two squares, in opposite corners, have been removed.
The task is to cover all the remaining squares exactly with donimoes, each of which covers two squares. No overlapping, either of dominoes on top of each other or of dominoes over the boundary of the multilated board are allowed.
Can this task be done?”
![Page 10: Knowledge Representation Chapter 4. 2 What is KR? R. Davis, H. Schrobe, P. Szolovits (1993): 1.A surrogate 2.A set of ontological commitments 3.A fragmentary.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc45503460f9498df03/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
10
Representation and Mapping
No. black squares = 30
No. white square = 32
![Page 11: Knowledge Representation Chapter 4. 2 What is KR? R. Davis, H. Schrobe, P. Szolovits (1993): 1.A surrogate 2.A set of ontological commitments 3.A fragmentary.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc45503460f9498df03/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
11
Representation and Mapping
Good representation:
• Representational adequacy
• Inferential adequacy
• Inferential efficiency
• Acquisitional efficiency
![Page 12: Knowledge Representation Chapter 4. 2 What is KR? R. Davis, H. Schrobe, P. Szolovits (1993): 1.A surrogate 2.A set of ontological commitments 3.A fragmentary.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc45503460f9498df03/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
Approaches to KR
Simple relational knowledge:
• Provides very weak inferential capabilities.
• May serve as the input to powerful inference engines.
![Page 13: Knowledge Representation Chapter 4. 2 What is KR? R. Davis, H. Schrobe, P. Szolovits (1993): 1.A surrogate 2.A set of ontological commitments 3.A fragmentary.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc45503460f9498df03/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
Approaches to KR
Inheritable knowledge:
• Objects are organized into classes and classes are organized in a generalization hierarchy.
• Inheritance is a powerful form of inference, but not adequate.
![Page 14: Knowledge Representation Chapter 4. 2 What is KR? R. Davis, H. Schrobe, P. Szolovits (1993): 1.A surrogate 2.A set of ontological commitments 3.A fragmentary.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc45503460f9498df03/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
Approaches to KR
Inferential knowledge:
• Facts represented in a logical form, which facilitates reasoning.
• An inference engine is required.
![Page 15: Knowledge Representation Chapter 4. 2 What is KR? R. Davis, H. Schrobe, P. Szolovits (1993): 1.A surrogate 2.A set of ontological commitments 3.A fragmentary.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc45503460f9498df03/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
Approaches to KR
Procedural knowledge:
• Representation of “how to make it” rather than “what it is”.
• May have inferential efficiency, but no inferential adequacy and acquisitional efficiency.
![Page 16: Knowledge Representation Chapter 4. 2 What is KR? R. Davis, H. Schrobe, P. Szolovits (1993): 1.A surrogate 2.A set of ontological commitments 3.A fragmentary.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc45503460f9498df03/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
16
Approaches to KR
Choosing the Granularity:
• High-level facts may not be adequate for inference.
• Low-level primitives may require a lot of storage.
![Page 17: Knowledge Representation Chapter 4. 2 What is KR? R. Davis, H. Schrobe, P. Szolovits (1993): 1.A surrogate 2.A set of ontological commitments 3.A fragmentary.](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022072005/56649cc45503460f9498df03/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
17
Homework
ReadingR. Davis, H. Schrobe, P. Szolovits (1993): “What is a
knowledge representation?”