1 / 20

Conceptual Graphs:

Conceptual Graphs:. Combing logic and semantic net. Motivations. Semantic networks & frame systems have trouble handling negation, the fact that something is not true disjunction quantification, the fact that something is true for all objects Conceptual graphs can handle them naturally.

fay
Download Presentation

Conceptual Graphs:

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Conceptual Graphs: Combing logic and semantic net

  2. Motivations • Semantic networks & frame systems have trouble handling • negation, the fact that something is not true • disjunction • quantification, the fact that something is true for all objects • Conceptual graphs can handle them naturally.

  3. Objectives • Examples of conceptual graphs • Conceptual graph syntax • Individual (article: the) and generic (article: a) concepts • Conceptual graph operations: how to produce new conceptual graphs from old ones • Conceptual graphs and logic

  4. A bird flies bird(B), flies(B). Examples of conceptual graphs • A dog has a color of brown • dog(D), brown(B), color(D,B). • A child has as parents, a father and a mother. • child(C), father(F), mother(M), parents(C,F,M). A relation of arity n is represented by a node having n arcs.

  5. Mary gave John the book • Concepts represented as boxes • Some concepts have a type and referent field • type : individual • Relations are represented as ovals. • Directed arcs connection concepts and conceptual relations • Unlike, semantic net, arcs are NOT labeled. Nodes represents concepts or relations

  6. Specific individuals Conceptual graph indicating that the dog named Emma is brown. Conceptual graph indicating that a particular (but unnamed) dog is brown. The marker # followed by a number indicates an individual in the domain of discourse. Conceptual graph indicating that a particular dog named Emma is brown.

  7. Conceptual graph of a person with three names Her name was McGill, and she called herself Lil, but everyone knew her as Nancy.

  8. The dog scratches its ear with its paw The marker * followed by a variable name indicates a particular unspecified individual, i.e., a fixed constant value. This is the same dog *Xas the one earlier.

  9. isa hierarchy Lattice: partial order The concept fido is ambiguous.

  10. universal type v is the common supertype of s and u. t is the common subtype of s and u. absurd type Type Hierarchy: Example s and u are not comparable.

  11. eats animal eats dog barks dog Operations to create new graphs copy: an exact copy restrict: nodes replaced by a node representing their specialization. dog is a specialized animal join: combines the two with the substitutions. simplify: removes duplicate relations eats dog barks

  12. Example: Simplification

  13. Example: Restriction

  14. Inheritance in conceptual graphs

  15. Relations between propositions • Tom believes that Jane likes pizza. • believesis a relation between an object and an entire proposition

  16. barks dog bites barks dog: emma bites Logical quantifiers dog(emma)  barks(emma)  bites(emma)  X (dog(X)  barks(X)  bites(X)) barks  X (dog(X)  barks(X)  bites(X)) dog: X bites

  17. Negation • All dogs are non-pink. xy ¬(dog(x)color(x,y)pink(y)) • There are no pink dog ¬(xy(dog(x)color(x,y)pink(y)))

  18. neg proposition barks dog:fido neg proposition barks dog More negations fido does not bark ¬(dog(fido)  bark(fido)) dog(fido) → ¬ bark(fido) bark(fido) → ¬ dog(fido) dogs do not bark  X ¬(dog(X)  bark(X))

  19. Conceptual graphs vs predicate logic • Any conceptual graph can be reformulated into predicate logic • But conceptual graphs support additional operations (ex. join, restrict…) • Restriction can be used to implement inheritance • Criticism • no sound inference rules • no formal semantics

  20. Conclusion • Conceptual graph expresses meaning in a form that is logically precise, humanly readable, and computationally tractable. • Unlike semantic net, it can naturally express logical negation and existential and universal quantifications. • We have now added another tool in our arsenal of knowledge representation.

More Related