Automated Reasoning in the Age of the Internet
The internet hosts a vast store of information that we cannot and should not ignore. It’s not enough just to retrieve facts. To make full use of the internet we must also infer new information from old. This is an exciting new opportunity for automated reasoning, but it also presents new kinds of research challenge.
There are a huge number of potential axioms from which to infer new theorems. Methods of choosing appropriate axioms are needed.
Information retrieved from the Internet must be automatically curated into a common format before we can apply inference to it. Such a representation must be flexible enough to represent a wide diversity of knowledge formats, as well as supporting the diverse kinds of inference we propose.
We can employ forms of inference that are novel in automated reasoning, such as using regression to form new functions from sets of number pairs, and then extrapolation to predict new pairs.
Information is of mixed quality and accuracy, so introduces uncertainty into the theorems inferred. Some inference operations, such as regression, also introduce uncertainty. Uncertainty estimates need to be inherited during inference and reported to users in an intelligible form.
We will report on the FRANK (Formally know as RIF: Rich Inference Framework. We changed the name as the RIF acronym is already in use, standing for Requirements Interchange Format.) system that explores this new research direction.
KeywordsQuery answering Prediction Automated reasoning World Wide Web
- 1.Bundy, A., Sasnauskas, G., Chan, M.: Solving guesstimation problems using the semantic web: four lessons from an application. Semant. Web, 1–14, 10 October 2013Google Scholar
- 2.Clifford, A.A.: Multivariate Error Analysis: A Handbook of Error Propagation and Calculation in Many-Parameter Systems. Applied Science Publishers, London (1973)Google Scholar
- 4.Green, C.C., Raphael, B.: The use of theorem-proving techniques in question-answering systems. In: Proceedings of the 1968 23rd ACM National Conference, pp. 169–181. ACM (1968)Google Scholar
- 5.Honnibal, M., Johnson, M.: An improved non-monotonic transition system for dependency parsing. In: Proceedings of the 2015 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 1373–1378. Association for Computational Linguistics, Lisbon, September 2015. https://aclweb.org/anthology/D/D15/D15-1162
- 8.Nuamah, K., Bundy, A.: Calculating error bars on inferences from web data. In: Intelligent Systems Conference. IEEE (2018)Google Scholar
- 10.Singhal, A.: Introducing the knowledge graph: things, not strings. Official Google Blog, May 2012Google Scholar
- 11.Vatant, B., Wick, M.: Geonames ontology (2012)Google Scholar