publicakkartik/am-utexas

Subversion checkout URL

You can clone with HTTPS or Subversion.

Fetching contributors…

Cannot retrieve contributors at this time

executable file 277 lines (235 sloc) 9.971 kb
 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 `:-public(h174/2)./* h174 creates a new operation by composing two existing operations.In clausal   form, the composition is expressed as fog(a,b,c,y):-g(a,b,c,x),f(x,y) which   is equivalent to f(g(a,b,c)) in functional notation. First function f is   checked to make sure that it has "arity" 2 (one input and one output    parameter). Next the lists of valid domains and ranges of the two functions   are checked to find a valid composite domain-range. Then the new algorithm   is created as a single prolog clause and is asserted. Finally a new concept   frame is filled in. Note that this heuristic is not really very useful   given the operations that we have defined; this is because very few of   our operations are of arity 2 with one input and one output parameter. *//* I noticed that all the other heuristics are of arity 1 and compute on   a single concept. I have also noticed that this heuristic never seems   to succeed and I hope that this will give it a better change to succeed.   -marcosRay's original code is in the rile h174-old.pl*/h174(F) :- getarity(F,2), get(G,[dom_range],Gdr), h174(F,G).h174(F,G):- getarity(F,2), get(F,[dom_range],Fdr), get(G,[dom_range],Gdr), get_composite_dr(Fdr,Gdr,FoGdr), make_composite_alg(F,G,FoGdr,Newname,Alg), create_composite_concept(F,G,Newname,Alg,FoGdr)./* Since I took ray's comment (see above) to mean that F should be allowed   to have arity 2+, I am defining a compose function that will allow   F to have arity n. I hope this works.    We start with the same h174, and then add to it a that will look for   a set of concepts to fill up the arity of F -marcos   Basically this is the way the compose function works. Given 2 functions   as input F(A...N) and G(A..N) compose creates a composition that composes   G with F and fills in the rest of Fs slots with compatable functions:   Given the functions F(A,B,C),G(D,E,F),H(G,I,K), this function creates   the composition F(G(D,E,F),H(G,I,K)) (C is the prolog output parameter).   This is way it looks like in PROLOG:   FoGH(A,B,D,E,Y):- G(A,B,X), IntermedFoH(D,E,X,Y).   IntermedFoH(D,E,X,Y):- H(D,E,Q), IntermedF(Q,X,Y).   IntermedF(Q,X,Y):- F(Q,X,Y).   It is written in a general way that will allow F to be arity N -marcos*/   h174(F,G):-        assertz(flag),        getarity(F,N1), N is N1 -1,        loop_composit(F,G,N,[],Glist,[],FoGdr,1),        makename(F,'_o_',Temp),        loopmakename(Temp,Glist,SeedName),        loop_make_composit(F,SeedName,Glist,FoGdr,Newname,Algorogo,N,0),!,        assertz(flag),        create_composite_concept2(F,Glist,Newname,Algorogo,FoGdr).         loopmakename(Temp,[],Temp).loopmakename(Temp,[G|Glist],R):- makename(Temp,G,Iname), loopmakename(Iname,Glist,R).loop_make_composit(F,Topname,[],[],Newname2,Alg2,Arity,Q):- getarity(F,N), makelist(N,List),        get(F,[defn,name],[Name]), Pred1 =.. [Name|List],        Pred2 =.. [Topname|List],        Alg = (Pred2:-Pred1),write(Alg),        assertz(Alg).loop_make_composit(F,Topname,[G|Glist],[FoGdr|FoGdrlist],Newname2,Alg2,Arity,Q):-        length(FoGdr,N),        N1 is N + 1,        makelist(N1,[Frange,Grange|Gdom]),        append(Gdom,[Grange],T1),        sumup(FoGdrlist,0,N2),        write('Q is '),write(Q),nl,        write('N2 is '),write(N2),nl,        N3 is N2 + Q,        makename(G,'_Caller',Temp),         makename(Temp,Arity,Iname),        makelist(N3,Hdomain),        append(Hdomain,[Grange],Hdomain1),        append(Hdomain1,[Frange],Hdomain2),        append(Gdom,Hdomain,Newdr1),        append(Newdr1,[Frange], Newdr),        get(G,[defn,name],[Main_functor_G]),        Func1 =.. [Main_functor_G|T1],        Func2 =.. [Iname|Hdomain2],        Func3 =.. [Topname|Newdr],        Alg=(Func3:-Func1,Func2),!,%debuggingwrite(Alg),        (/*flag,*/fail,        check_with_user2(F,G,Topname,Alg,Newname2),        assertz(newname(Newname2));        Newname2 = Topname),        Func4=..[Newname2|Newdr],        Alg2=(Func4:-Func1,Func2),        assertz(Alg2),        (retract(flag); true),        Arity2 is Arity - 1,        Q2 is Q + 1,        loop_make_composit(F,Iname,Glist,FoGdrlist,_,_,Arity2,Q2).        sumup([],N2,N2).sumup([L1|List],N2,N3):- length(L1,N4), N5 is N2 + N4 - 1, sumup(List,N5,N3).        loop_composit(F,G,N,X,X,Y,Y,_):-        N = 0.loop_composit(F,G,N,Glist,New_Glist,Old_FoGdr,New_FoGdr,It) :-        get(F,[dom_range],Fdr),        bget(G,[dom_range],Gdr),        get_composite_dr(Fdr,Gdr,FoGdr,It),        N1 is N - 1,        It2 is It + 1,        loop_composit(F,_,N1,[G|Glist],New_Glist,[FoGdr|Old_FoGdr], New_FoGdr,It2).      /* a general get_composit_dr */get_composite_dr(Fdr,Gdr,FoGdr,It):-        member(X,Gdr),         split_last(X,Gdom,Grange),        genls_sf(Grange,Gens_of_grange),        member(FDR,Fdr), split_last(FDR,Fdom,Frange), get_arg_num_val(Fdom,Fdom2,It,1),        member(Fdom2,Gens_of_grange),        append(Gdom,[Frange],FoGdr).get_arg_num_val([DOM1|DOMLIST],DOM1,IT,IT).get_arg_num_val([_|DOMLIST],DOM1,IT,IT3):-        IT2 is IT3 + 1, get_arg_num_val(DOMLIST,DOM1,IT,IT2).          /* get_composite_dr finds a legal domain-range for the composition. It searches   the domain-range lists of f and g for a pair such that the   range of g is the domain of f. The legal composite is g's domain and f's   range. */get_composite_dr(Fdr,Gdr,FoGdr):-        member(X,Gdr),         split_last(X,Gdom,Grange),        genls_sf(Grange,Gens_of_grange),        member([Fdom,Frange],Fdr),        member(Fdom,Gens_of_grange),        append(Gdom,[Frange],FoGdr)./* make_composite_alg creates f o g in clausal form. First it gensyms a list   of symbols to serve as variables in the clause. Then it assigns them to   g's domain, g's range(1), and f's range(1). Then a new clause is synthesized and given the tentative name F_o_G (where F_o_G(...Y):-G(...X),F(X,Y).). Finally the user is shown the composition and is given a chance to reject it or to rename it, then the algorithm is asserted. */make_composite_alg(F,G,FoGdr,Newname2,Alg):- length(FoGdr,N),N1 is N+1, makelist(N1,[Frange,Grange|Gdom]), append(Gdom,[Grange],T1), T2=[Grange,Frange], get(F,[defn,name],[Main_functor_F]), get(G,[defn,name],[Main_functor_G]), Func1=..[Main_functor_G|T1], Func2=..[Main_functor_F|T2], makename(F,'_o_',Temp), makename(Temp,G,Newname), append(Gdom,[Frange],Newdr), Func3=..[Newname|Newdr], Alg=(Func3:-Func1,Func2),!,%debuggingwrite(Alg), check_with_user2(F,G,Newname,Alg,Newname2), Func4=..[Newname2|Newdr], Alg2=(Func4:-Func1,Func2), assertz(Alg2)./* create_composite_concept creates a concept frame for the new operation. Then a task is added to the agenda to generate examples of the new concept. */create_composite_concept(F,G,Conceptname,Alg,Dom_range):- put(Conceptname,[name],Conceptname), put(Conceptname,[defn,name],Conceptname), put(Conceptname,[alg],Conceptname),%I had to use putvals and not put as ray had it. That was a bug -marcos putvals(Conceptname,[dom_range],Dom_range), put(Conceptname,[genl],F), put(Conceptname,[genl],G), put(Conceptname,[compose],[F,G]), /* pseudo-facet identifies composition */ get(F,[worth],[W1]), get(G,[worth],[W2]), New_worth is (W1+W2)/2, put(Conceptname,[worth],New_worth), addtoagenda(fillin,Conceptname,[examples],200, 'no examples of this new concept').create_composite_concept2(F,Glist,Conceptname,Alg,Dom_range):- put(Conceptname,[name],Conceptname), put(Conceptname,[defn,name],Conceptname), put(Conceptname,[alg],Conceptname),%I had to use putvals and not put as ray had it. That was a bug -marcos putvals(Conceptname,[dom_range],Dom_range), put(Conceptname,[genl],F), putlist(Conceptname,[genl],Glist), append([F],Glist,FGlist), put(Conceptname,[compose],FGlist), /* pseudo-facet identifies composition */ get(F,[worth],[W1]), get_ave_worth(Glist,0,0,W2), New_worth is (W1+W2)/2, put(Conceptname,[worth],New_worth), addtoagenda(fillin,Conceptname,[examples],200, 'no examples of this new concept')./*utility-ru for my bastard piece of modification on ray's code.*/get_ave_worth([],C,W2,R):- R is W2/C.get_ave_worth(Glist,C,W2,_):- var(Glist), !,fail.get_ave_worth([G|Glist],C,W2,R):- C2 is C + 1,        get(G,[worth],[W4]),        W3 is W2 + W4, get_ave_worth(Glist,C2,W3,R)./*this is just putvals rewritten because I did not know aboutputvals -marcos.*/putlist(Conceptname,FS,[]).putlist(Conceptname,FS,[G|Glist]):- put(Conceptname,FS,G), putlist(Conceptname,FS,Glist)./* check_with_user2 allows the user to discard or rename a newly created    composition. If he/she renames the concept, the new name is returned.   Note that this routine is very similar to check_with_user written by Bruce.   *//* taking this unnecessary gabbing out! -marcos*/check_with_user2(F,G,Newname,Alg,Newname2):- assertz(gensymed_concepts(Newname,Alg,none)).check_with_user2(F,G,Newname,Alg,Newname2):-        nl,nl,        write('I have created a new concept definition which is a composition of '),nl,        write(F),write(' and '),write(G),nl,        write('This concept is defined as follows:'),nl,        write(Alg),nl,        write('Do you want to keep this new concept (y/n)? '),        nl,aminput('y'),        write('Please type new name for this concept or to keep the current name: '),        nl,aminput(X),        ((X='',Newname2=Newname);         (\+ X='',Newname2=X)).`
Something went wrong with that request. Please try again.