heartlogic-dev@nongnu.org
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [Heartlogic-dev] rumination prototype

Subject: RE: [Heartlogic-dev] rumination prototype
From: "William L. Jarrold"
Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 02:02:57 -0500 CDT


On Mon, 9 May 2005, Joshua N Pritikin wrote:

On Sat, 2005-05-07 at 14:03 -0500, William L. Jarrold wrote:
I also agree with Josh's basic reactions.  I noticed a few typo
levels things and a few places things could look cleaner.  I doubt
I have time to go into that right now, but stay tuned.

Here's the list I used:

Jesus loves his father because Jesus is God's son.

Yes.  Technically this might be better put as...

Jesus loves his father. [q]

...and then later, they can click on this and see why. I.e. they would see the premises which were:

Sons love their fathers. [p1]
Jesus is God's son. [p2]

Actually for deductions (like the above, and like "Vienna is wet.") we would want two conditions:

1) the believability of the conclusion alone (e.g. the participant would see q alone).

2) the believabilty of the conclusion in the context of the premises (e.g. the participant would we "q because p1 and p2".)

Vienna is wet.

Slightly better to say...

"The city of Vienna Austria is wet."

Rivers are a kind of water.
If water touches x then x is wet.
The Danube is a river.

Slightly better to say...

"The river Danube is a river."

...because this is prolly the way an AI (e.g. Cyc) would generate it.

The Danube runs through Vienna.

Slightly better to say

"The river Danube runs through the City of Vienna Austria."

If a river runs through a region is touches that region.
Hillary Clinton feels zero dislike for Bill Clinton.
Hillary Clinton is married to Bill Clinton.
Spouses love each other.
Love is the opposite of contempt

Slightly better to say

Love and contempt are opposite emotions.

if you feel emotion x and y is the opposite emotion of x then you feel
zero amount of y.

Here might be better wording the normal people might be more likely to
understand...

Suppose a person is experiencing some emotion, call it EMOTION-X.

Also, suppose that the opposite emotion of EMOTION-X is
OPPOSITE-EMOTION,

It follows from the above that they are experiencing zero amount of
OPPOSITE-EMOTION.

Actually how we word the rule could even be a variable...that is
probably somethign for later.


..One wuick
reaction is it would be nice if there were a clear line or some
graphical and/or textual element that made clear the boundary between
"what you already did and the next thing we want you to rate."

Hrm, a thick line seemed too heavy so I placed seven "birsd" ~.~ as a
divider.  Maybe the birds are not heavy enough.  Suggestions?


Sorry, I dunno diddly about such web design issues.

Maybe do the separation with two tables?

<....>

I think we should have half of the items be reversed items too.

Reversed means adding "It is not true that ..." ?

Maybe.  We should maybe try it several ways.  The advantage of "It is
not true that" is that it is easy to compute the reversed version
(simply pre-pend a "It is not true that.."). For these pilot items, I kind of prefer painstakingly crafted reversals. See below...

Item 1 unreversed:

Jesus loves his father because:
(a) Sons love their fathers. and
(b) Jesus is God's son.

Item 1 reversed:

Jesus loves his father not because
(a) Sons love their fathers. nor
(b) Jesus is God's son.

Item 2 unreversed:

Jesus loves his father.

Item 2 unreversed:

Jesus does not love his father.

Jesus loves his father nnot because
(a) Sons love their fathers. nor
(b) Jesus is God's son.

Item 3: unreversed

The City of Vienna, Austria is wet.

Item 3: reversed

The City of Vienna, Austria is not wet.

..Okay, I'm pooped gotta do the rest later.

Bill


_______________________________________________
Heartlogic-dev mailing list
Heartlogic-dev@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/heartlogic-dev

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>