RE: [Heartlogic-dev] rumination prototype

[William L. Jarrold]

On Tue, 10 May 2005, Joshua N Pritikin wrote:

> On Tue, 2005-05-10 at 02:02 -0500, William L. Jarrold wrote:
> > On Mon, 9 May 2005, Joshua N Pritikin wrote:
> > > Jesus loves his father because Jesus is God's son.
> >
> > Yes.  Technically this might be better put as...
> >
> > Jesus loves his father. [q]
> >
> > ...and then later, they can click on this and see why.  I.e. they would
> > see the premises which were:
> >
> > Sons love their fathers. [p1]
> > Jesus is God's son. [p2]
>
> Hrm, do you want to do this (click to see reasons) for the pilot?

Yes, the would be my moderately strong preference.

We must remember that we are building a platform for doing all sortsa
experiments.

> If so
> then you'll need to specify dependency information.

I am not sure what you mean by dependency info...Simply have the item
be ...

Jesus loves his father.

<click here to see why HAL believes this>

;; note: interface will give you this option after you have provided the rating.

HAL concludeds that:

        Jesus loves his father.

because:

        Sons love their fathers.
        Jesus is God's son.

> > Actually for deductions (like the above, and like "Vienna is wet.") we
> > would want two conditions:
> >
> > 1) the believability of the conclusion alone (e.g. the participant would
> > see q alone).
> >
> > 2) the believabilty of the conclusion in the context of the premises (e.g.
> > the participant would we "q because p1 and p2".)
>
> OK, that's just a matter of adding more items.

Right.

> > Slightly better to say...
> >
> > "The river Danube is a river."
>
> Heh, that's funny.  :-)

Yes.  It can sometimes be a real hoot to read Cyc's deductions.

> > Suppose a person is experiencing some emotion, call it EMOTION-X.
> >
> > Also, suppose that the opposite emotion of EMOTION-X is
> > OPPOSITE-EMOTION,
> >
> > It follows from the above that they are experiencing zero amount of
> > OPPOSITE-EMOTION.
> >
> > Actually how we word the rule could even be a variable...that is
> > probably something for later.
>
> Sure, just write an item generator.
>
> Hrm, instead of telling me which items you want, why not just modify the
> attached script?

Sure, will do, but not right now.

Bill

> --
> If you are an American then support http://fairtax.org
> (Permanently replace 50,000+ pages of tax law with about 200 pages.)