week3 conceptual dependency
TRANSCRIPT
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Lectures on Artificial Intelligence – CS364Lectures on Artificial Intelligence – CS364
Conceptual DependencyConceptual Dependency
20th September 2005
Dr Bogdan L. [email protected]
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 2
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
ContentsContents• Definition of Conceptual Dependency Grammar
• Building blocks
• Advantages and disadvantages
• Exercises
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 3
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Concepts and RepresentationConcepts and Representation• A number of authors in AI have addressed the question of
the 'concept'-based organisation of knowledge and we use two examples to illustrate this:
– Firstly, we consider a verb-oriented organisation of knowledge proposed by Schank: Conceptual Dependency Grammar.
– Then we go on to discuss a highly nominalised system proposed by Sowa: Conceptual Graphs.
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 4
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Conceptual DependencyConceptual Dependency• Conceptual dependency (or CD) is a theory of how to
represent the meaning of natural language sentences in a way that:
– First, facilitates for drawing inferences from the sentences.
– Second, the representation (CD) is independent of the language in which the sentences were originally stated.
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 5
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Conceptual Dependency TheoryConceptual Dependency Theory• Schank's (1975) Conceptual Dependency Theory was developed as
part of a natural language comprehension project.
• Schank's claim was that sentences can be translated into basic concepts expressed as a small set of semantic primitives.
• Conceptual dependency allows these primitives, which signify meanings, to be combined to represent more complex meanings.
• Schank calls the meaning propositions underlying language "conceptualisations".
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 6
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Conceptual Dependency TheoryConceptual Dependency Theory• Schank’s project is the ‘representation of meaning in an
unambiguous language-free manner’ (1973:187).
• ‘Any two utterances that can be said to mean the same thing, whether they are in the same or different languages, should be characterised in only one way by the conceptual structure’ (1973:191)
• Towards a representation ‘in terms that are as interlingual and as neutral as possible’ (ibid.)
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 7
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
CD Building BlocksCD Building Blocks• CD theorists argue that
– "the CD representation of a sentence is built not out of primitives corresponding to the words used in the sentence, but rather out of conceptual primitives that can be combined to form the meanings of words in any particular language"
• Building Blocks– Primitive conceptualizations (conceptual categories)
– Conceptual dependencies (diagrammatic conventions)
– Conceptual cases
– Primitive acts
– Conceptual tenses
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 8
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Primitive ConceptualizationsPrimitive Conceptualizations• Schank emphasises analysis of a sentence/utterance at the
conceptual level or to analyse conceptualisation.
• Conceptual dependency theory of four primitive conceptualizations:
– actions (ACT: actions)
– objects (PP: picture producers)
– modifiers of actions (AA: action aiders)
– modifiers of objects (PA picture aiders)
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 9
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Concept can beConcept can be• An abstract or concrete object that invokes an image
– "cars" are concrete objects– "gravity" is an abstract concept
• An object (nominal) produces a picture (PP)
• Something an animate object does.– "running" is an action
• A modifier that modifies an object or an action.• A modifier that specifies an action or a nominal.
– "blue" is a PA modifier (e.g. A blue car)– "quickly" is a AA modifier (e.g. He quickly run)
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 10
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Conceptual DependenciesConceptual Dependencies• Conceptual categories (PP, ACT, PA and AA) relate to each other in
specified ways. These relations are called dependencies by Schank.
• In a dependency relation, one partner or item is dependent and the other dominant or governing.
• A governor dependent is a partially ordered relationship– A dependent must have a governor and is understood in terms of the
governor– A governor may or may not have dependent(s) and has an independent
existence– A governor can be a dependent
• PP and ACT are inherently governing categories.• PA and AA are inherently dependent.
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 11
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Conceptual DependenciesConceptual Dependencies• For a conceptualisation to exist, there must be at least two
governors:– E.g. Sally stroked her fat cat
PP: Sally, cat, her [Sally]
ACT: stroke
PA: fat
Governors: Sally, stroke, cat
Dependent: PP (cat) on ACT (stroke)
PA (fat) on PP (cat)
PP (cat) on PP (her[Sally])
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 12
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Building CD graphsBuilding CD graphs• E.g. Sally stroked her fat cat
– Sally and stroking are necessary for conceptualisation: there is a two-way dependency between each other:
Sally stroke
– Sally’s cat cannot be conceptualised without the ACT stroke it has an objective dependency on stroke
Sally stroke cat. O
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 13
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Building CD graphsBuilding CD graphs• E.g. Sally stroked her fat cat
– The concept ‘cat’ is the governor for the modifier ‘fat’:
Sally stroke cat fat
– The concept PP(cat) is also governed by the concept PP(Sally) through a prepositional dependency:
Sally stroke cat POSS-BY
fat Sally[her]
O
O
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 14
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
I
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 15
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Conceptual CasesConceptual Cases• Dependents that are required by an ACT are called Conceptual
Cases:
• There are four main conceptual cases:
– Objective Case (O)
– Recipient Case (R)
– Instrumental Case (I)
– Directive Case Relation (D)
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 16
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Conceptual CasesConceptual Cases– Objective Case (O): "John took the book"
oPP [John] PP [book]o
ACT [took]
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 17
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Conceptual CasesConceptual Cases– Recipient Case (R): "John took the book from Mary"
PP [John]
PP [John]
PP [book]
PP [Mary]
o
R
ACT [took]
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 18
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Conceptual CasesConceptual Cases– Instrumental Case (I): "John ate the ice cream with a spoon"
IPP [John]
PP [John]
ACT [eat]
PP [ice cream]
PP [spoon]
o
o
ACT [do]
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 19
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Conceptual CasesConceptual Cases– Directive Case Relation (D) "John drove his car to London from
Guildford"
PP [John] ACT [do]
ACT [drove]PP [car]
PP [London]
PP [Guildford]
D
POSS-BY
PP [John]
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 20
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Prepositional DependencyPrepositional DependencyConsider the following sentences:
Possessione.g. "This is Sally’s cat": Cat
POSS-BY Sally
Locatione.g. "Sally is in London": London
LOCSally
Containmente.g. "The glass contains water": Water
CONTGlass
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 21
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Primitive ACTsPrimitive ACTsPrimitive Act Elaboration
ATRANS Transfer of an abstract relationship such as possession ownership or control (give)
PTRANS Transfer of the physical location of an object (go)
PROPEL Application of a physical force to an object (push)
MOVE Movement of a body part of an animal by that animal (kick)
GRASP Grasping of an object by an actor (grasp)
INGEST Taking in of an object by an animal to the inside of that animal (eat)
EXPEL Expulsion of an object from the object of an animal into the physical world (cry)
MTRANS Transfer of mental information between animals or within an animal (tell)
MBUILD Construction by an animal of new information of old information (decide)
CONC Conceptualise or think about an idea (think)
SPEAK Actions of producing sounds (say)
ATTEND Action of attending or focusing a sense organ towards a stimulus (listen)
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 22
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Primitive ACTsPrimitive ACTse.g. I gave a book to Sally
PP [I]
PP [Sally]
PP [book]
PP [I]o
RACT [gave]
I
Sally
book
Io
RATRANS
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 23
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Conceptual TensesConceptual Tenses• Any conceptualisation can be modified as a whole by a
conceptual tense.
• John took the book (John took) can be denoted by looking at the lemma take (from which the past tense took was derived):
John ATRANSp
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 24
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Conceptual TensesConceptual Tenses
Symbol Elaborationp Past
f Future
t Transition
ts Start Transition
tf Finished Transition
k Continuing
? Interrogative
/ Negative
nil Present
delta Timeless
c Conditional
"John will be taking the book":
or
"John is taking the book":
or
John taking
John ATRANSk
John taking
John ATRANSf
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 25
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Summarising CD Building BlocksSummarising CD Building BlocksE.g. I took a book from Sally
• Primitive conceptualizations (conceptual categories):– Objects (Picture Producers: PP): Sally, I, book
• Conceptual dependencies (diagrammatic conventions):– Arrows indicate the direction of dependency– Double arrow indicates two way link between actor and action
• Conceptual cases:– "O" indicates object case relation– "R" indicates recipient case relation
• Primitive acts:– ATRANS indicates transfer (of possession)
• Conceptual tenses:– "p" indicates that the action was performed in the past
I
I
book
Sallyo
RATRANS
p
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 26
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Semantic Nets Vs CDSemantic Nets Vs CD• Semantic Nets only provide a structure into which nodes
representing information can be placed.
• Conceptual Dependency representation, on the other hand, provides both a structure and a specific set of primitives out of which representations of particular pieces of information can be constructed.
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 27
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Advantages of CDAdvantages of CD• The organisation of knowledge in terms of the primitives
(or 'primitive acts') leads to a fewer inference rules.
• Many inferences are already contained in the representation itself.
• The initial structure that is built to represent the information contained in one sentence will have holes in it that have to be filled in:– holes which will serve as attention focusers for subsequent
sentences.
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 28
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Disadvantages of CDDisadvantages of CD• CD requires all knowledge to be broken down into 12 primitives:
sometimes inefficient and sometimes impossible.
• CD is essentially a theory of the representation of events: though it is possible to have an event-centred view of knowledge but not a practical proposition for storing and retrieving knowledge.
• May be difficult or impossible to design a program that will reduce sentences to canonical form. (Probably not possible for monoids, which are simpler than natural language).
• Computationally expensive to reduce all sentences to the 12 primitives.
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 29
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
ExercisesExercises• Please create the conceptual dependency representation of
the following sentences:– John ran
– John is a Doctor
– John’s Dog
– John pushed the cart
– Bill shot Bob
– John ate the egg
– John prevented Mary from giving a book to Bill
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 30
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Solution 1Solution 1• "John ran" (Schank and Colby 1973)
John PTRANSp
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 31
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Solution 2Solution 2• "John is a doctor" (Schank and Colby 1973)
John doctor
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 32
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Solution 3Solution 3• "John’s Dog" (Schank and Colby 1973)
dog
John
POSS-BY
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 33
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Solution 4Solution 4• "John pushed the cart" (Schank and Colby 1973)
oJohn carto
PROPELp
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 34
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Solution 5Solution 5• "Bill shot Bob" (Schank and Colby 1973)
oRob
gun
RBill bulleto
PROPELp
pBob
health(-10)
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 35
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Solution 6Solution 6• "John ate the egg" (Schank and Rieger 1974).
o
INSIDE
MOUTH
John
John
D
John eggoINGEST
p
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 36
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
Solution 7Solution 7• "John prevented Mary from giving a book to Bill" (Schank
and Rieger 1974).
Mary
pJohn DO
Bill
book
Mary
o
R
c/
p
ATRANS
20th September 2005 Bogdan L. Vrusias © 2005 37
Artificial Intelligence – CS364Artificial Intelligence – CS364Knowledge RepresentationKnowledge Representation
ClosingClosing
• Questions???
• Remarks???
• Comments!!!
• Evaluation!