From jawbrey at att.net Mon Jul 7 06:15:50 2008 From: jawbrey at att.net (Jon Awbrey) Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2008 07:15:50 -0400 Subject: [Arisbe] adaptive finite state automata (AFSA) References: <9ef66fac0807031127v5c835f3cifaa24180708730e3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4871FAE6.251CE389@att.net> o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o How did evolution make the Evol Knevol jump over the Grand Canyon between finite state languages and non-finite state languages? I once pursued a research program along these lines, exploring the finite state or markov rim of the canyon by writing a series of programs for sequential learning of 2-level formal languages. Though it's not much help with the complexities of bona fide natural languages, it did give me some insight into how much can be done with adaptive finite state transition trees in a real-time environment. The crux of the matter, however, seems to reside in the more broadly logical question about the gap between simple inductive learning and abductive inquiry by way of hypothesis testing. I will be travelling soon, but can look up some links to previous work and discussions if anyone wants them. Jon Awbrey CC: Arisbe, CG List, Inquiry Albretch Mueller wrote: > > As we well know, there are many languages that are very similar. > In many cases, to a large extent if not fully, they share the > same alphabet, syntax rules and even phonemes. > > So, since parsers are essentially fed text sequentially (and naturally so) > I wonder what are the strategies developed out there for pluggable parsing > strategies (depth or breath first), some lexicon (which does not have to > be totally complete) and rules describing the generative possibilities > of this lexicon. > > As you could tell I am not a linguist myself, but after reading > James Allen's Natural Lang Understanding, in which he, even if the > theory is general, exclusively uses plenty of examples of English, > I think such an "English Grammar file" may not be that difficult > to device and if you do it for English I could easily imagine > that there are such files for other NL which definitely are > less fractured/more homogeneous. > > Where can you find actual well-formed, declarative description > of some NL grammar including language features, constrains and > everything (possible ;-)) in XML format or Backus-Naur form or > such in-depth theoretical studies? > > thanks > lbrtchx o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o inquiry e-lab: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/ mwb: http://www.mywikibiz.com/Directory:Jon_Awbrey mathweb: http://www.mathweb.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey getwiki: http://www.getwiki.net/-UserTalk:Jon_Awbrey p2p wiki: http://www.p2pfoundation.net/User:JonAwbrey planet math: http://planetmath.org/?op=userobjs;id=15246 zhongwen wp: http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey ontolog: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?JonAwbrey http://www.altheim.com/ceryle/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=JonAwbrey wp review: http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showuser=5619 o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o From jawbrey at att.net Thu Jul 31 08:32:54 2008 From: jawbrey at att.net (Jon Awbrey) Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 09:32:54 -0400 Subject: [Arisbe] Charles Sanders Peirce, "On a New List of Categories" References: Message-ID: <4891BF06.CE921195@att.net> o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o Rich, The material on Peirce in Wikipedia is a mess -- speaking as one of several foolhardy Peirceans who "died on the hill, or their swords, etc." trying to "fix it", all to no avail. Best to get the 2 volume "Essential Peirce" for starters, and check out the articles at Joseph Ransdell's "Arisbe": http://www.cspeirce.com/ The first thing to know about Peirce's Categories is that he also called them "Predicaments", after a clssical-medieval usage that means a predicate of a predicate. In terms of the extensions of concepts this means that a Category is really a class of relations. Cheers, Jon CC: Arisbe List, Inquiry List corpora-request at uib.no wrote: > > Today's Topics: > > 5. [Peirce's] ON A NEW LIST OF CATEGORIES (Rich Cooper) > 9. [Peirce's] ON A NEW LIST OF CATEGORIES (Gill Philip) > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2008 15:06:03 -0700 > From: "Rich Cooper" > Subject: [Corpora-List] Pierce's ON A NEW LIST OF CATEGORIES > To: > > This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > > I've been trying to read Pierce's "On a New List of Categories" at > > http://www.cspeirce.com/menu/library/bycsp/newlist/nl-frame.htm > > The problem is that it is highly populated with arcane terms that have > little or no meaning to my 2008 experience. Does anyone have a more modern > version, perhaps a rephrasing of the same material? This is the part about > Firstness, Secondness and Thirdness, and all the ancillary materials in the > following matrix from > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Peirce#Theory_of_categories > > Peirce's Categories (technical name: the cenopythagorean categories[21] > ) > > Name: > > Typical characterizaton: > > As universe of experience: > > As quantity: > > Technical definition: > > Valence, "adicity": > > Firstness. > > Quality of feeling. > > Ideas, chance, possibility. > > Vagueness, "some". > > Reference to a ground (a ground is a pure abstraction of a quality)[22] > round-21> . > > Essentially monadic (the quale, in the sense of the thing with the quality). > > Secondness. > > Reaction, resistance, (dyadic) relation. > > Brute facts, actuality. > > Singularity, discreteness. > > Reference to a correlate (by its relate). > > Essentially dyadic (the relate and the correlate). > > Thirdness. > > Representation. > > Habits, laws, necessity. > > Generality, continuity. > > Reference to an interpretant*. > > Essentially triadic (sign, object, interpretant*). > > From hearing previous discussions about Pierce, this seems to be the kernel > concept of his works. So it would be useful to know what he means in these > areas. > > Alternative URLs appreciated, > > -Rich > > Sincerely, > > Rich Cooper > > EnglishLogicKernel.com > ------------------------------ > > Message: 9 > Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:49:28 +0200 > From: "Gill Philip" > Subject: [Corpora-List] Pierce's ON A NEW LIST OF CATEGORIES > To: "Rich Cooper" > Cc: corpora_AT_uib.no > > Dear Rich, > > having glanced at the URL you've been "trying to read", (Ithink) I see what > the problem is - the paper is a very concise synthesis of ideas which, if I > remember correctly (and it's been a long time since I read Peirce), are > explained 'long-hand' elsewhere. Sometimes those seemingly brief writings > actually take far longer to grasp than the longer ones... > If you can get hold of a copy of Peirce's complete writings, you'll find all > the terms better set out, probably over a series of chapters. > Try C.S Peirce (1857-1866 / 1965) Collected Papers. Cambridge MA: Harvard > University Press. > If you're lucky, google books might have indexed it too. Otherwise we'll > have to wait on some kind soul who'se modernised the language a bit. > > hope this is some help to you, > best, > Gill o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o inquiry e-lab: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/ mwb: http://www.mywikibiz.com/Directory:Jon_Awbrey knol: http://knol.google.com/k/-/-/3fkwvf69kridz/1 mathweb: http://www.mathweb.org/wiki/User:Jon_Awbrey getwiki: http://www.getwiki.net/-UserTalk:Jon_Awbrey p2p wiki: http://www.p2pfoundation.net/User:JonAwbrey planet math: http://planetmath.org/?op=userobjs;id=15246 ontolog: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?JonAwbrey http://www.altheim.com/ceryle/wiki/Wiki.jsp?page=JonAwbrey wp review: http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showuser=5619 o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o