TYPICAL: A Knowledge Representation System for Automated Discovery and Inference

TYPICAL is a package for describing and making automatic inferences about a broad class of SCHEME predicate functions. These functions, called types following popular usage, delineate classes of primitive SCHEME objects, composite data structures, and abstract descriptions. TYPICAL types are generated by an extensible combinator language from either existing types or primitive terminals. These generated types are located in a lattice of predicate subsumption which captures necessary entailment between types; if satisfaction of one type necessarily entail satisfaction of another, the first type is below the second in the lattice. The inferences make by TYPICAL computes the position of the new definition within the lattice and establishes it there. This information is then accessible to both later inferences and other programs (reasoning systems, code analyzers, etc) which may need the information for their own purposes. TYPICAL was developed as a representation language for the discovery program Cyrano; particular examples are given of TYPICAL's application in the Cyrano program.

The Use of Equality in Deduction and Knowledge Representation

This report describes a system which maintains canonical expressions for designators under a set of equalities. Substitution is used to maintain all knowledge in terms of these canonical expressions. A partial order on designators, termed the better-name relation, is used in the choice of canonical expressions. It is shown that with an appropriate better-name relation an important engineering reasoning technique, propagation of constraints, can be implemented as a special case of this substitution process. Special purpose algebraic simplification procedures are embedded such that they interact effectively with the equality system. An electrical circuit analysis system is developed which relies upon constraint propagation and algebraic simplification as primary reasoning techniques. The reasoning is guided by a better-name relation in which referentially transparent terms are preferred to referentially opaque ones. Multiple description of subcircuits are shown to interact strongly with the reasoning mechanism.

ONTIC: A Knowledge Representation System for Mathematics

Ontic is an interactive system for developing and verifying mathematics. Ontic's verification mechanism is capable of automatically finding and applying information from a library containing hundreds of mathematical facts. Starting with only the axioms of Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory, the Ontic system has been used to build a data base of definitions and lemmas leading to a proof of the Stone representation theorem for Boolean lattices. The Ontic system has been used to explore issues in knowledge representation, automated deduction, and the automatic use of large data bases.

Qualitative Knowledge, Casual Reasoning and the Localization of Failures

This report investigates some techinques appropriate to representing the knowledge necessary for understanding a class of electronic machines -- radio receivers. A computational performance model - WATSON - is presented. WATSONs task is to isolate failures in radio receivers whose principles of operation have been appropriately described in his knowledge base. The thesis of the report is that hierarchically organized representational structures are essential to the understanding of complex mechanisms. Such structures lead not only to descriptions of machine operation at many levels of detail, but also offer a powerful means of organizing "specialist" knowledge for the repair of machines when they are broken.

Reasoning Modeled as a Society of Communicating Experts

This report describes a domain independent reasoning system. The system uses a frame-based knowledge representation language and various reasoning techniques including constraint propagation, progressive refinement, natural deduction and explicit control of reasoning. A computational architecture based on active objects which operate by exchanging messages is developed and it is shown how this architecture supports reasoning activity. The user interacts with the system by specifying frames and by giving descriptions defining the problem situation. The system uses its reasoning capacity to build up a model of the problem situation from which a solution can interactively be extracted. Examples are discussed from a variety of domains, including electronic circuits, mechanical devices and music. The main thesis is that a reasoning system is best viewed as a parallel system whose control and data are distributed over a large network of processors that interact by exchanging messages. Such a system will be metaphorically described as a society of communicating experts.

Toward a Theory of Representation Design

This research is concerned with designing representations for analytical reasoning problems (of the sort found on the GRE and LSAT). These problems test the ability to draw logical conclusions. A computer program was developed that takes as input a straightforward predicate calculus translation of a problem, requests additional information if necessary, decides what to represent and how, designs representations capturing the constraints of the problem, and creates and executes a LISP program that uses those representations to produce a solution. Even though these problems are typically difficult for theorem provers to solve, the LISP program that uses the designed representations is very efficient.

ARLO: Another Representation Language Offer

This paper describes ARLO, a representation language loosely modelled after Greiner and Lenant's RLL-1. ARLO is a structure-based representation language for describing structure-based representation languages, including itself. A given representation language is specified in ARLO by a collection of structures describing how its descriptions are interpreted, defaulted, and verified. This high level description is compiles into lisp code and ARLO structures whose interpretation fulfills the specified semantics of the representation. In addition, ARLO itself- as a representation language for expressing and compiling partial and complete language specifications- is described and interpreted in the same manner as the language it describes and implements. This self-description can be extended of modified to expand or alter the expressive power of ARLO's initial configuration. Languages which describe themselves like ARLO- provide powerful mediums for systems which perform automatic self-modification, optimization, debugging, or documentation. AI systems implemented in such a self-descriptive language can reflect on their own capabilities and limitations, applying general learning and problem solving strategies to enlarge or alleviate them.

Automated Reasoning About Classical Mechanics

In recent years, researchers in artificial intelligence have become interested in replicating human physical reasoning talents in computers. One of the most important skills in this area is predicting how physical systems will behave. This thesis discusses an implemented program that generates algebraic descriptions of how systems of rigid bodies evolve over time. Discussion about the design of this program identifies a physical reasoning paradigm and knowledge representation approach based on mathematical model construction and algebraic reasoning. This paradigm offers several advantages over methods that have become popular in the field, and seems promising for reasoning about a wide variety of classical mechanics problems.

Using Analogy to Acquire Commonsense Knowledge from Human Contributors

The goal of the work reported here is to capture the commonsense knowledge of non-expert human contributors. Achieving this goal will enable more intelligent human-computer interfaces and pave the way for computers to reason about our world. In the domain of natural language processing, it will provide the world knowledge much needed for semantic processing of natural language. To acquire knowledge from contributors not trained in knowledge engineering, I take the following four steps: (i) develop a knowledge representation (KR) model for simple assertions in natural language, (ii) introduce cumulative analogy, a class of nearest-neighbor based analogical reasoning algorithms over this representation, (iii) argue that cumulative analogy is well suited for knowledge acquisition (KA) based on a theoretical analysis of effectiveness of KA with this approach, and (iv) test the KR model and the effectiveness of the cumulative analogy algorithms empirically. To investigate effectiveness of cumulative analogy for KA empirically, Learner, an open source system for KA by cumulative analogy has been implemented, deployed, and evaluated. (The site "1001 Questions," is available at http://teach-computers.org/learner.html). Learner acquires assertion-level knowledge by constructing shallow semantic analogies between a KA topic and its nearest neighbors and posing these analogies as natural language questions to human contributors. Suppose, for example, that based on the knowledge about "newspapers" already present in the knowledge base, Learner judges "newspaper" to be similar to "book" and "magazine." Further suppose that assertions "books contain information" and "magazines contain information" are also already in the knowledge base. Then Learner will use cumulative analogy from the similar topics to ask humans whether "newspapers contain information." Because similarity between topics is computed based on what is already known about them, Learner exhibits bootstrapping behavior --- the quality of its questions improves as it gathers more knowledge. By summing evidence for and against posing any given question, Learner also exhibits noise tolerance, limiting the effect of incorrect similarities. The KA power of shallow semantic analogy from nearest neighbors is one of the main findings of this thesis. I perform an analysis of commonsense knowledge collected by another research effort that did not rely on analogical reasoning and demonstrate that indeed there is sufficient amount of correlation in the knowledge base to motivate using cumulative analogy from nearest neighbors as a KA method. Empirically, evaluating the percentages of questions answered affirmatively, negatively and judged to be nonsensical in the cumulative analogy case compares favorably with the baseline, no-similarity case that relies on random objects rather than nearest neighbors. Of the questions generated by cumulative analogy, contributors answered 45% affirmatively, 28% negatively and marked 13% as nonsensical; in the control, no-similarity case 8% of questions were answered affirmatively, 60% negatively and 26% were marked as nonsensical.