-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Reasoning against pre-reasoned sources #23
Comments
As suggested by @arminhaller - in lieu of metadata about the reasoning status of sources as discussed in SolidLabResearch/Challenges#14 (comment), we can in some case heuristically determine this based on the presense of data. For example some superset of RDFS inferencing is likely enabled if a triple of the form I suggest we create a bus that takes a source as input and returns the types of reasoning that have been applied to that source. Then one actor can be this heuristic actor, a second actor uses metadata exposed by the source, and a third actor uses the |
One can possibly view this reduced problem as one of 'incremental reasoning' - where the pod data can be abstractly considered as an 'insertion' into the main KB. |
For extra points - handle dialogical reasoning SolidLabResearch/Challenges#22 |
Expanding upon SolidLabResearch/Challenges#14 (comment) with some implementation specific ideas.
As a first-pass lets make the following assumptions (which can be verified inside the appropriate actors
test
method) to simplify the problem:premise-conclusion
style format (i.e. no quantification, nesting etc.)As a 'naive' first implementation we can then do the following:
initialBindings
.1
, except now we create theseinitialBindings
using results produced in the previous iteration of reasoning.^^ Most of this logic would also be re-usable to optimize the current rule evaluation strategies as well.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: