The frame problem, the relevance problem, and a package solution to both

As many philosophers agree, the frame problem is concerned with how an agent may efficiently filter out irrelevant information in the process of problem-solving. Hence, how to solve this problem hinges on how to properly handle semantic relevance in cognitive modeling, which is an area of cognitive science that deals with simulating human’s cognitive processes in a computerized model. By “semantic relevance”, we mean certain inferential relations among acquired beliefs which may facilitate information retrieval and practical reasoning under certain epistemic constraints, e.g., the insufficiency of knowledge, the limitation of time budget, etc. However, traditional approaches to relevance—as for example, relevance logic, the Bayesian approach, as well as Description Logic—have failed to do justice to the foregoing constraints, and in this sense, they are not proper tools for solving the frame problem/relevance problem. As we will argue in this paper, Non-Axiomatic Reasoning System (NARS) can handle the frame problem in a more proper manner, because the resulting solution seriously takes epistemic constraints on cognition as a fundamental theoretical principle.

[1]  Greg Restall,et al.  Information Flow and Relevant Logics , 1996 .

[2]  W. Quine Ontological Relativity and Other Essays , 1969 .

[3]  John McCarthy,et al.  SOME PHILOSOPHICAL PROBLEMS FROM THE STANDPOINT OF ARTI CIAL INTELLIGENCE , 1987 .

[4]  E. Mares Relevant Logic: A Philosophical Interpretation , 2004 .

[5]  R. Audi Dispositional beliefs and dispositions to believe , 1994 .

[6]  Branden Fitelson The Paradox of Confirmation1 , 2006 .

[7]  Robert A. Wilson,et al.  Book Reviews: The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences , 2000, CL.

[8]  S. Laurence,et al.  Concepts: Core Readings , 1999 .

[9]  Carl G. Hempel,et al.  I.—STUDIES IN THE LOGIC OF CONFIRMATION (II.) , 1945 .

[10]  J. Fodor The Mind Doesn't Work That Way : The Scope and Limits of Computational Psychology , 2000 .

[11]  Pei Wang,et al.  Formalization of Evidence: A Comparative Study , 2009, J. Artif. Gen. Intell..

[12]  Bernhard Nebel,et al.  An Empirical Analysis of Terminological Representation Systems , 1992, Artif. Intell..

[13]  Judea Pearl,et al.  Probabilistic reasoning in intelligent systems - networks of plausible inference , 1991, Morgan Kaufmann series in representation and reasoning.

[14]  Marvin Minsky,et al.  A framework for representing knowledge , 1974 .

[15]  M. Shanahan Solving the frame problem , 1997 .

[16]  P. Spirtes,et al.  Causation, prediction, and search , 1993 .

[17]  Keith Devlin,et al.  Logic and information , 1991 .

[18]  Pei Wang,et al.  Three fundamental misconceptions of Artificial Intelligence , 2007, J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell..

[19]  John Haugeland The nature and plausibility of Cognitivism , 1978, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[20]  W. Quine Main trends in recent philosophy: two dogmas of empiricism. , 1951 .

[21]  P. Kleingeld,et al.  The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy , 2013 .

[22]  Aziz F. Zambak The Frame Problem - Autonomy Approach versus Designer Approach , 2011, PT-AI.

[23]  Pei Wang From Inheritance Relation to Non-Axiomatic Logic , 1994 .

[24]  M R Quillian,et al.  Word concepts: a theory and simulation of some basic semantic capabilities. , 1967, Behavioral science.

[25]  David S. Touretzky,et al.  The Mathematics of Inheritance Systems , 1984 .

[26]  Pei Wang,et al.  The limitation of Bayesianism , 2004, Artif. Intell..

[27]  Y. Shoham What is the frame problem , 1987 .

[28]  M. Young Relevance and Relationalism , 2011 .

[29]  Pei Wang Confidence as Higher-Order Uncertainty , 2001, ISIPTA.

[30]  Manfred Jaeger,et al.  Probabilistic Reasoning in Terminological Logics , 1994, KR.

[31]  W. Quine The two dogmas of empiricism , 1951 .

[32]  M. de Rijke,et al.  Logic, language and computation, vol. 2 , 1999 .

[33]  Daniel C. Dennett,et al.  Cognitive Wheels: The Frame Problem of AI , 1990, The Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence.

[34]  J. Fodor The Modularity of mind. An essay on faculty psychology , 1986 .

[35]  Pei Wang From inheritance relation to nonaxiomatic logic , 1994, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[36]  M. Black Review: Karl Menger, Tri-Operational Algebra; Ferdinand L. Brown, Remarks Concerning Tri-Operational Algebra; Carl G. Hempel, Studies in the Logic of Confirmation , 1945 .

[37]  John E. Hershey,et al.  Computation , 1991, Digit. Signal Process..

[38]  Tony Lawson,et al.  The Context of Prediction (and the Paradox of Confirmation) , 1985, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.

[39]  Edwin D. Mares,et al.  Relevant logic and the theory of information , 1996, Synthese.

[40]  J. Michael Dunn,et al.  Relevance Logic and Entailment , 1986 .

[41]  Pei Wang Analogy in a general-purpose reasoning system , 2009, Cognitive Systems Research.

[42]  Drew McDermott,et al.  Nonmonotonic Logic and Temporal Projection , 1987, Artif. Intell..

[43]  J. Mackie The Relevance Criterion of Confirmation , 1969, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.

[44]  Umberto Straccia,et al.  Reasoning within Fuzzy Description Logics , 2011, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[45]  Diego Calvanese,et al.  The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and Applications , 2003, Description Logic Handbook.

[46]  Hubert L. Dreyfus,et al.  How to stop worrying about the frame problem even though it's computationally insoluble , 1987 .

[47]  Pei Wang,et al.  Rigid Flexibility: The Logic of Intelligence , 2006 .

[48]  Ruth Weintraub A paradox of confirmation , 1988 .

[49]  P. Spirtes,et al.  Causation, Prediction, and Search, 2nd Edition , 2001 .

[50]  Ralf Küsters Non-Standard Inferences in Description Logics , 2001, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[51]  J. Pearl Causality: Models, Reasoning and Inference , 2000 .

[52]  Alexander Bird,et al.  Natural Kinds , 1988, Philosophy.

[53]  John Yen,et al.  Generalizing Term Subsumption Languages to Fuzzy Logic , 1991, IJCAI.

[54]  Pei Wang,et al.  Heuristics and normative models of judgment under uncertainty , 1996, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[55]  Pei Wang,et al.  The Generation and Evaluation of Generic Sentences , 2004 .

[56]  Ronald J. Brachman,et al.  What's in a Concept: Structural Foundations for Semantic Networks , 1977, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[57]  Dov M. Gabbay,et al.  Handbook of Philosophical Logic , 2002 .

[58]  M. de Rijke,et al.  Logic, Language and Computation , 1997 .

[59]  Arnon Avron,et al.  What is relevance logic? , 2014, Ann. Pure Appl. Log..

[60]  Eric Lormand Framing the frame problem , 2004, Synthese.

[61]  Raymond Reiter,et al.  On Interacting Defaults , 1981, IJCAI.