THE STRUCTURE AND ORGANIZATION OF A SEMANTIC NET FOR COMPREHENSION AND INFERENCE

We have developed a network representation for propositional knowledge that we believe to be capable of encoding any proposition expressible in natural language. The representation can be regarded as a computer-oriented logic with associative access paths from concepts to propositions. Its syntax is closely modeled on predicate calculus but includes constructs for expressing some kinds of vague and uncertain knowledge. The representation allows the encoding and efficient use of caselike semantic constraints on predicate arguments for the purpose of language comprehension: these constraints are simply implications of the predicates concerned. Our approach to language comprehension is based on nonprimitive representations. We argue that primitive representations of simple propositions are often extremely complex, and offer no real advantages. We have demonstrated these ideas with a mini-implementation capable of mapping certain kinds of declarative sentences into the network representation. The implementation emphasizes the proper handling of iterated adjectival modifiers, especially comparative modifiers. More recently, we have worked on the problem of rapid access to the facts that are relevant to a query. Our solution involves the use of back-link structures from concepts to propositions, called “topic access skeletons,” which conform with general topic hierarchies in memory. For example, the proposition “Clyde is grey” is classified under the “coloring” topic for Clyde, which is subsumed under the “appearance” topic, and in turn under the “external quality” topic, and finally under the “physical quality” topic for Clyde. The form of a query (or of an assertion) can be used to determine what concepts in memory should be accessed as starting points, and what paths in the associated access skeletons should be followed in order to access the relevant information. We have demonstrated the feasibility of building such hierarchies, inserting information into them automatically, and accessing the inserted information with a second experimental implementation. The hierarchic organization appears capable of providing order-of-magnitude improvements in question-answering efficiency, with only a doubling in storage costs.

[1]  M. Black Vagueness. An Exercise in Logical Analysis , 1937, Philosophy of Science.

[2]  Yorick Wilks Primitives and words , 1975, TINLAP '75.

[3]  Casimir A. Kulikowski,et al.  IRIS: A System for the Propogation of Inferences in a Semantic Net , 1977, IJCAI.

[4]  Benjamin Kuipers,et al.  A FRAME FOR FRAMES: Representing Knowledge for Recognition , 1975 .

[5]  Philip J. Hayes On Semantic Nets, Frames and Associations , 1977, IJCAI.

[6]  Lenhart K. Schubert Extending The Expressive Power Of Semantic Networks , 1976, IJCAI.

[7]  Jerry R. Hobbs,et al.  Making Computational Sense of Montague's Intensional Logic , 1977, Artif. Intell..

[8]  Yorick Wilks,et al.  An artificial intelligence approach to machine translation. , 1972 .

[9]  Raymond Reiter,et al.  Anaphora and Logical Form: On Formal Meaning Representations for Natural Language , 1977, IJCAI.

[10]  Yorick Wilks Do machines understand more than they did? , 1974, Nature.

[11]  J. A. Fodor,et al.  Tom Swift and his procedural grandmother , 1978, Cognition.

[12]  Daniel G. Bobrow,et al.  On Overview of KRL, a Knowledge Representation Language , 1976, Cogn. Sci..

[13]  Allan Collins,et al.  A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing , 1975 .

[14]  M. Ross Quillian,et al.  The teachable language comprehender: a simulation program and theory of language , 1969, CACM.

[15]  Hector J. Levesque,et al.  An Overview of a Procedural Approach to Semantic Networks , 1977, IJCAI.

[16]  Patrick Henry Winston,et al.  Learning structural descriptions from examples , 1970 .

[17]  Norman I. Badler,et al.  l.Pak: A SNOBOL-Based Programming Language for Artificial Intelligence Applications , 1973, IJCAI.

[18]  Roger C. Schank,et al.  The Primitive ACTs of Conceptual Dependency , 1975, TINLAP.

[19]  Donald A. Norman,et al.  A process model for long-term memory. , 1972 .

[20]  William A. Woods,et al.  What's in a Link: Foundations for Semantic Networks , 1975 .

[21]  Richard Montague,et al.  ENGLISH AS A FORMAL LANGUAGE , 1975 .

[22]  C. I. Lewis,et al.  The Semantic Conception of Truth and the Foundations of Semantics , 1944 .

[23]  Roger C. Schank,et al.  Conceptual dependency: A theory of natural language understanding , 1972 .

[24]  W. Alston Philosophy of Language , 1964 .

[25]  Stuart C. Shapiro,et al.  A Net Structure for Semantic Information Storage, Deduction and Retrieval , 1971, IJCAI.

[26]  QuillianM. Ross The teachable language comprehender , 1969 .

[27]  Yorick Wilks,et al.  A Preferential, Pattern-Seeking, Semantics for Natural Language Inference , 1975, Artif. Intell..

[28]  Drew McDermott Symbol-mapping: a technical problem in PLANNER-like systems , 1975, SGAR.

[29]  Lotfi A. Zadeh,et al.  The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning-III , 1975, Inf. Sci..

[30]  Ronald J. Brachman,et al.  A Structural Paradigm for Representing Knowledge. , 1978 .

[31]  Martin Kay,et al.  The MIND System , 1970 .

[32]  Gordon I. McCalla An Approach to the Organization of Knowledge for the Modelling of Converstion , 1978 .

[33]  Jack Minker,et al.  The Use of a Semantic Network in a Deductive Question-Answering System , 1977, IJCAI.

[34]  Roger C. Schank,et al.  Inference and the Computer Understanding of Natural Language , 1973, Artif. Intell..

[35]  Jerry R. Hobbs Coherence and Interpretation in English Texts , 1977, IJCAI.

[36]  William S. Havens A Procedural Model of Recognition , 1977, IJCAI.

[37]  Lenhart K. Schubert,et al.  Toward a State Based Conceptual Representation , 1975, IJCAI.

[38]  Nick Cercone A Note on Representing Adjectives and Adverbs , 1977, IJCAI.