Difference between revisions of "Vulcan/MeetingNotes/Aug09 2013"
(→Notes) |
(→Agenda) |
||
Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
<b>We an use this as part of the larger inference-based solution.</b> | <b>We an use this as part of the larger inference-based solution.</b> | ||
− | == Agenda == | + | <!-- == Agenda == |
Things to discuss in the meeting. | Things to discuss in the meeting. | ||
Line 74: | Line 74: | ||
* Can we directly use these without Jena? We are using Jena for efficiency purposes. How large can the inference graph be for BLP or MLN? | * Can we directly use these without Jena? We are using Jena for efficiency purposes. How large can the inference graph be for BLP or MLN? | ||
+ | --> | ||
== To Do == | == To Do == |
Revision as of 22:40, 9 August 2013
Update
- Focusing on system development.
- 1. Inferencer stub using Jena. Stub takes in axioms and rules and outputs a derviation.
- 2. Tested stub with axioms and rules that would help us solve the iron nail example.
- 3. Built Proposition extractor stub that converts the answer assertions into propositions represented as Open IE 4.0 tuples
- 4. Exploring other triplestore/inference systems (OWLIM and Seasame). Jena API doesn't readily support multiple derivations. Ask Jena community to find out if this is possible.
- Resource collection
- 1. Gathered assertions from Peter/Phil. Each assertion corresponds to a single multiple choice answer.
- 2. Found RDF representations for WordNet and imported them into Jena.
- Analysis
- 1. Selected 10 propositions that are single Open IE tuples as starting targets.
- 2. Started to write down steps involved in verifying these propositions.
Notes
1. Do we really needed an inference engine (Jena)?
We need a way to scale down the search space for BLP and MLN. Inference engine is one way to do this.
Discussed the steps involved for answering 5 different questions.
What happens when deductive inference fails?
Approach A:
Identify axioms that are highly "similar" to some node in the backward chained derivation graph.
Add weak entailment rules (axiom -> derivation node) scored using edit distance.
Approach B:
Find the answer that is most plausible.
e.g., (x, helps, a fox find food), where x is one of {sense of smell, thick fur, long tail, pointed teeth}
We don't find sentences that directly state that "sense of smell helps fox find food". However, several sentences say "sense of smell helps animals find food".
"smell helps * find food" returns 7 million hits on Google.
"fur helps * find food" returns no hits.
This is a form of abductive reasoning using linguistically motivated templates.
Implement Approach B as a standalone method for answering questions.
We an use this as part of the larger inference-based solution.
To Do
- System building
- 1. Create a system architecture page with a figure and overview of the main components.
- 2. Continue system building.
- Create a derivation scorer stub. This will be replaced with a MLN or a BLP scorer.
- Test with iron nail example.
- 3. Jena API doesn't readily support multiple derivations.
- Ask Jena community to find out if this is possible.
- See if OWLIM can be used as a replacement.
- 4. Try out Tuffy MLN implemenatation.
- Use output of iron nail example
- If easy to use write wrappers around Tuffy to hook into our system.
- 5 Write evaluation code.
- Check with Peter.
- Resource Collection
- Experiments