3 ms·
Well, I just clicked through your link and the "data" is very nicely organized like this (yes, literally): father(Christopher, Arthur) father(Christoph
by yongjik 11y ago
Well, I just clicked through your link and the "data" is very nicely organized like this (yes, literally):
father(Christopher, Arthur)
father(Christopher, Victoria)
father(Andrew, James)
father(Andrew, Jennifer)
...
mother(Penelope, Arthur)
mother(Penelope, Victoria)
mother(Christine, James)
...
This is about as close to a "logical input" as one can possibly get. One would naturally expect a logic-based system to handle this very well, so the fact that it indeed does is not that interesting.
Moreover, IMHO, it is not clear how we could extend a logic-based system to handle the messiness of natural language. (Well, perhaps it was also unclear how to do that with word vectors, when Hinton wrote that paper, but now it's pretty clear.)
Not saying word vectors are the "ultimate" solution, but logic isn't even at the level of word vectors.
- YeGoblynQueenne 11y agoThe data is in that format because Quinlan pre-processed it for use in FOIL, which expects first-order logic terms as input, but I don't see what that's a problem? Turning natural language to word embeddings is a very similar process: you might as well argue that the fact that a statistical system does well with word vectors is not that interesting (it is, it's a brilliant idea). >> it is not clear how we could extend a logic-based system to handle the messiness of natural language. There's a lot of recent stuff in Muggleton's Latest Advances in Inductive Logic Programming and a ton of work from others, before and after that. There's no problem in handling "messiness" with logic. Like I note elsewhere, your computer is a logic machine and it handles messiness just fine (no offense meant).