A Simple AI Capable of Basic Reading Comprehension • Hacker News Board

Re: A Simple AI Capable of Basic Reading Comprehension

#61

Post by T-Roy » Sat, Sep 19, 2015, 5:52 PM UTC

aamar wrote: post #35

kajecounterhack wrote: post #22

The difference between this graph and propositional logic is only that the predicates joining concepts are arbitrary instead of logic operators. In that sense, this is like Google Knowledge Graph / Freebase. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propositional_calculus#Solvers Solving a set of propositional logic statements is NP-Complete. I'd argue "reading comprehension" is actually knowing the state of the world after a pi…

Classic example: The iron ball fell on the glass table, and it shattered. The glass ball fell on the iron table, and it shattered. Human readers will pick the correct antecedent for "it" in each case, so it's not ambiguous. But correct interpretation depends on knowing something about how likely glass and iron are to shatter. I love these kinds of examples, but I don't think they ought to significantly deter the kind…

OpenCyc is a really cool implementation of one solution to this problem.

The way it was explained to me, computers don't know that when you turn a full cup of coffee upside down, the liquid will fall out. Cyc attempts to provide a framework for that.

http://sw.opencyc.org

Re: A Simple AI Capable of Basic Reading Comprehension

#62

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Sep 20, 2015, 2:52 AM UTC

jameshart wrote: post #57

reptation wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While this is a interesting point, grammarians will bristle at such an imprecise use of 'it', which should unambiguously refer to one antecedent.

Who are these 'grammarians', and why should anyone care what makes them bristle? They evidently have a complete lack of appreciation for the semantic content of sentences and can only see syntax. What a very poor view of language that would be. Professional writers, editors, and teachers of language would be perfectly fine with those sentences, because they understand language as being made up of syntax AND semantics…

[deleted]

Re: A Simple AI Capable of Basic Reading Comprehension

#63

Post by reptation » Sun, Sep 20, 2015, 3:03 AM UTC

jameshart wrote: post #57

reptation wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While this is a interesting point, grammarians will bristle at such an imprecise use of 'it', which should unambiguously refer to one antecedent.

Who are these 'grammarians', and why should anyone care what makes them bristle? They evidently have a complete lack of appreciation for the semantic content of sentences and can only see syntax. What a very poor view of language that would be. Professional writers, editors, and teachers of language would be perfectly fine with those sentences, because they understand language as being made up of syntax AND semantics…

In the admittedly artificially constructed SAT, the second sentence would seem to be an almost classic example of unacceptable ambiguity. Perhaps in real life, you are correct that the adjectives provide sufficient context.

Re: A Simple AI Capable of Basic Reading Comprehension

#64

Post by sp332 » Sun, Sep 20, 2015, 11:45 AM UTC

ganarajpr wrote: post #18

nyamhap wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When was that xkcd posted? - couldn't not find a date. Since machine vision is such a fast moving field, I think date is relevant for understanding the context of this xkcd. Is image recognition of a bird so inconceivable at the moment? Perhaps the joke now would be - "I'll need one researcher and one year"

One researcher and a month ( perhaps even less ! ) is more like it..

As pointed out in the hover-text, AI research has been trying to do this since the 60's and it has only been possible recently. That's a lot more than one researcher and a month!