| { |
| "paper_id": "J78-3035", |
| "header": { |
| "generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0", |
| "date_generated": "2023-01-19T03:05:45.004728Z" |
| }, |
| "title": "WITH A ,SPOON I N HAND THIS MUST BE THE EATING FRAME", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "Eugene", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Char N I A K Department O F Hmputer Science", |
| "suffix": "", |
| "affiliation": {}, |
| "email": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": "", |
| "venue": null, |
| "identifiers": {}, |
| "abstract": "A language camprehension program using \"framestf \" s c r i p t s f ' , etc. must b e a b l e t o d e c i d e which framed are a p p r o p r i a t e to the text.", |
| "pdf_parse": { |
| "paper_id": "J78-3035", |
| "_pdf_hash": "", |
| "abstract": [ |
| { |
| "text": "A language camprehension program using \"framestf \" s c r i p t s f ' , etc. must b e a b l e t o d e c i d e which framed are a p p r o p r i a t e to the text.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Abstract", |
| "sec_num": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "body_text": [ |
| { |
| "text": "i s n o t a l q a y s so easy.('%+ woman way@ while-the man on t h e s t a g e sawed her i n h a l f \" s w g e a t s MAGICIAN b u t how?) T h i s paper w i l l examine how a program might g o about determining t h e a p p r o p r i a t e frame in such cases.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "A t a s u f f i c i e n t l y sag* l e v e l the model presented h e r e w i l l reaembge t h a t o f Minsky (1975) i n it's a s s m p t i o n chat one u s u a l l y h a s a v a i l a b l e one o r more c o n t e x t frames.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 102, |
| "end": 115, |
| "text": "Minsky (1975)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Hence one o n l y needs worry i f information comes i n w h i c h d o e s n o t P i t them.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "A s opposed t o Minsky however t h e s u g g e s t i o n s f o r new c o n t e x t frames w i l X not come from t h e old ones, but r a t h e r from t h e c o n f l i c t i n 8 information.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The problem them becomes how p o t e n t i a l frames a r e indexed under t h e i n f o m a t ion which \"suggestsw them.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "making i n f e r e n t e s from a v e r y large base of common s e n s e knowledge. To avoid d e a t h by c m b i n a t o r i a l explosion our computer must be h b l e t o ~c c e s s t h e knowledqe i t n e d s without i r r e l e v a n t knowledse ~e t t i n g i n i t s m y . A p l a u s i b l e c o n s t r a i n t on t h e knowledge we m i~h t use a t a %iven point i n a s t~r y o r c o n v e r s a t i o n ( I s h a l l henceforth simply assme we are d e a l i n g w i t h a s t o r y ) is' t o =strict c o n s i d e r a t i o n to t h a t p o r t i o n o f our knowledge which is \"&bout\" t h i n g s which have been mentioned i n t h e d i s c o u r s e . So i f w e have a s t o r y which menttons t r a i n s and t r a i n s t a t i o n s , we w i l l not use our knowledge o f , shy, circuees. T h i s r e q u i r e s , of course. t h a t g i v e n a t o p i c , such a s t r a i n s , or e a t i n g . we must be a b l e to acCess i t s knowledge without going t h r o q h a v e r y t hing we know.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Understanding every d a y d i s c o u r s e r e q u i r e s", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Hence we a r e lead i n a natural way t o something approaching a notion of \"frame\" (Minsky a c o l l e c t i o n o f knowledge about a s i n g l e stereotyped s t t u a t i o n . I n t h e above discussion however I have made a r a t h e r important slight o f hand. Given s t o r y we only want to consider those frames \"about\" t h i n g s t n the s t o r y . l b w L s i t that we d e c i d e which frames q u a l i t y '", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Understanding every d a y d i s c o u r s e r e q u i r e s", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "I was a b l e t o g l o s s over t h i s because i n most s i t u a t i o n s t h e problca, a t l e a s t a t a s u r f a c e Iwel. does n o t appear a l l thst d i f f i c u l t .", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Understanding every d a y d i s c o u r s e r e q u i r e s", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "If t h e s t o r y i s abotlt: t r a i n s . i t will s u r e l~ meqtion t r a i n s .", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Understanding every d a y d i s c o u r s e r e q u i r e s", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "So we see t h e word \"train\". and we assume t h a t t r a i n s ate r e l e v a n t . What could be easier.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Understanding every d a y d i s c o u r s e r e q u i r e s", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Unfortunately, this ease 1s d e c e p t i v e f o r t h e s t o r y may mentton many topics of which o n l y a few a r e t r w l y important t o the s t o r y . For example.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Understanding every d a y d i s c o u r s e r e q u i r e s", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The lawyer gook a cab t o *the r e s t a u r a n t near the uni'(iereit.y.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Understanding every d a y d i s c o u r s e r e q u i r e s", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Here w? have \"lawyer\", \"cab\" , \" r e s t a u r~n t \" and \" u n i v e r s i t~\" a11 o f which are c a l l i n g f 6 r o u r a t t e n t i o n . Somehow on t h e b a s i s of latef l i n e s we must weed o u t t h o s e which our o n l y incjidentak . To s m a t i z e , t h e l a s t few paragraphs, the problem o f frame determinatioin i n language comprehension $ n v~l v e s t h r e e sub-problms .", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Understanding every d a y d i s c o u r s e r e q u i r e s", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "1) stories will t y p i c a l l y e I d d e t o many h i g h e r fraqks, any of which might serve as the contax& for the incoming Iinee. Nnw d o we choose between them? 2 ) The words used i n a s t o r y may not directly i n d i c a t e t h e proper higher frame. l?uw In tbe paper which follows I w i l l be p r i m a r i l y concentrate 3n ( 2 ) w i t h (3) b e i q mentfoned o c c a s i o n a l l y . I n essence my p o s i t i o n on ( 1 i a t h a t it w i l l not be t o o much o f a problem, provided t h a t &he c o s t o f s e t t i n g up a c o n t e x t like \" r w t a u r a n t \" i~ small. f f i t ; i s never used then a s Fhe stary g o e s on it w i l l teceeded l n t a the background How t h i s \"receed ing \" takes place I shall, not s a y . a i n c e f o r one thing i t is 4 problem i n many a r e a s , and f o r a n o t h e r , 1 don't know.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Understanding every d a y d i s c o u r s e r e q u i r e s", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Concerning 2and ( 3 ) , we w i l l be lead t o a p 0 8 i t i a h similar t o t h a t o f MLnsky (1975) We w i l l s e e however, t h a t t h e r e a t e s t i l l a l o t o f problema with t h i s * polpMion which d o not a t f i r s t glance me& t h e eye.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 89, |
| "end": 102, |
| "text": "MLnsky (1975)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Understanding every d a y d i s c o u r s e r e q u i r e s", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "' 1 THE CLUE INTERSECTION METHOD Rather than immediately presenting my scheme, let m e s t a r t by showing the problems with a n a l b r n a t i v e p o s s i b i l i t y , which I w i l l c a l l t h e \"clue i n t e r s e c t i o n \" metbod. This a l t e r n a t i v e is by no means a strats man a s one researcher has i n f a c t e x p l i c i t l y suggested i t (Fahlman 1977) and I f o r one find i t a v e r y n a t u r a l way of t h i n k i n g about t h e problem.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 368, |
| "end": 382, |
| "text": "(Fahlman 1977)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Understanding every d a y d i s c o u r s e r e q u i r e s", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The i d e a behind t h i s mkghod i s t h a t we a r e given oergain c l u e s i n t h e istory about t h e n a t u r e of the c o r r e c t Erame, and t o find t h e frame we simply i n t The c l u e s h e r e a r e t h i n g s l i k e \"aisle\", \" t u n a f i s h ' e t c .", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Understanding every d a y d i s c o u r s e r e q u i r e s", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "the English w r d s which a r e the c l u e s , but r a t h e r the concepts which underlie the words. I w t l l assuue t h a t we go from one t o the o t h e r v i a a n independent? parsing algorithm.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Of course, I d o not mean t o say t h a t i t i s", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(However t h i s assumes t h a t t h e r e Is no v i c i o u s i n t e r a c t i o n b e t w e n f r b e d s e r m i n a t i o n and d lsambigua t i o n . Given t h a t dieadbiguation depends W U p r i o r frame determinatiop (see (Hayes 1977) for numerous examples) t h i s may be i n c o r r e c t . ) So the input t o the frame d e t e r m i n~r w i l l be something l i k e SUPEWA&KET. The point i s t h a t none o f these e l m s w i l l be unambiguous, but when we take the i n t e r s e c t i o n the qnly t h i n g which vill be l e f t i s SUPERMARKET.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 231, |
| "end": 243, |
| "text": "(Hayes 1977)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Of course, I d o not mean t o say t h a t i t i s", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "ST-1 (WALK JACK-1 AISLE-1) ST-2 ( PERSON JAC K-1 ) ST-3 (EQUAL (NAME JACK-1 ) \"JACK\") S T 4 (EQUAL (SEX JACK-1 ) MALE) ST-5 (AISLE AISLE-1 ST06 (PUT JACK-I TUNA-FISH<@-1 BASKET-1) ST97 (BASKET B&RET-I)", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Of course, I d o not mean t o say t h a t i t i s", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "There are, however, problems with t h i s v i e w of t h i n g s .", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Of course, I d o not mean t o say t h a t i t i s", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "For one t h i n g i t i g n o r e s what I w i l l c a l l t h e \"clue s e l e c t i o n \" problem. This seemed reasonable given t h a t t h e y d o tend t o s t g g e s t \"supermarket\", a s d e s i r e d . But there is more information i n t h e sentence. It was Jack who d i d a l l o f t h i s . Why not i n t e r s e c t what we know about Jack with a l l of t h e r e s t , o r WALK? Or a g a i nsupgose something ever so s l i g h t l y odd h a m . such a s t h e basket h i t t i n g a qcrewdriver which i s on t h e Eloor.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Of course, I d o not mean t o say t h a t i t i s", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "SCREWDRIVER w i l l have vacioua t h i n g s indexed undqr i t , but more l i k e l y t h a n not t i n t e r k e c t i o n with t h e rest of t h e i t e m s mentioned above w i l l g i v e us t h e n u l l set. For t h a t m a t t e r , i s t h e r e any reason w o n l y i n t e r s e c t t h i n g s i n the same sentence? The answer here i s c l e a r l y n6, s i n c e t h e r e a r e many examples which r e q u i r e j u s t t h e opposite.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Put i n t h e p l a i n e s t fashiqn the d i f f i c u l t i y h e r e i s d e c i d i n g e x a c t l y what clues", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Jack was walking, down an a i s l e . Fur thermore , t h e r e a r e some problems with t h e c l u e i n t x r s e c t i s n method which go beyond t h e mere a r e themselves dependent on havlng t h e c o n t e x t frames a v a i l a b l e . That i s t o s a y , before we can rule o u t SUPhRMARKET, we need some p i e c e o f information from t h e SUPERMARaT frame which w i l l e n a b l e us t o say t h a t Jack should not b e t u r n i n g on a l i g h t . g i v e n t h a t he is cast i n t h e r o l e o f SHOPPER i n t h a t frame-I n t e r e s t i n g l y e n o w h , Fahlman (who I e a r l i e r noted i s a proponent o f t h e c l u e i n t e r s e c t i o n method) had a major role i n t h e e v o l u t i o n o f t h e Minsky proposal whic4 I advocate. It seems reaeonable: t o a s s m e t h a t we guess even b e f o r e t h e second s e n t e n c e t h a t J a c k w l l l make a c a l l . Tb a n t i c i p a t e t h i s wr, must have TELEF?iOWXNG indexed under TELEPHONE.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Put i n t h e p l a i n e s t fashiqn the d i f f i c u l t i y h e r e i s d e c i d i n g e x a c t l y what clues", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "When we see t h e fir a t l i n e we first t r y t o ' i n t e g r a t e i t i n t o what m a l r e a d y know. S i n c e t h e r e w i l l be nothing there t o i n t e g r a t e i t i n q o , we try ", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Put i n t h e p l a i n e s t fashiqn the d i f f i c u l t i y h e r e i s d e c i d i n g e x a c t l y what clues", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "A a N C muat b e i n t h e prdximity a f t h e phone, and Jack j u s t accompliqhed t h a t . Hence we a r e a b l e t o i n t e g r a t e (AT", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "TELEPHONINC i s t h a t t h e", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "TELEPHONIhG frame, and e v e r y t h i n g is f i n e . ; I f we i n s t a n t i a t e t h e ROOM frame t h e n t h e ;HOME-PHONE v a r i a b l e i n i t shquld be bound ; t o the . token which i s bound t o THING.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "TEBPHONE-1) i n t o t h e", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "; S i m i l a r l y f o r PUBLIC-LOC and PAY-PHONE . ", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "TEBPHONE-1) i n t o t h e", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(TELEPHONING (PHONE . mLEPHONE-1)) [ROOM (ROOM . ROOM-1 ) ( HOMELPHONE . T E~ PHONE-1 ) )", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "TEBPHONE-1) i n t o t h e", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The syntax h e r e i 8 t h e name o f t h e frame followed [ROOM-1 (UNIT)", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "TEBPHONE-1) i n t o t h e", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "<SELF ( a ROOM w i t h HOME-PHONE TELEPHONE-1 )> ]", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "TEBPHONE-1) i n t o t h e", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "So,= a r e hypotheslzlng 1) an i n s t a n c e o f telephoning, where t h e o n l y t h i n g w e know about i t i s t h e telephone involved, and 2 ) a room (ROOM-1 ) which a t t h e moment is o n l y furnished with a telephone. Note Bkat t h i s assumes t h a t i n our room frame we have a n explicit s l o t for a telephone. This i s e q u i v a l e n t t o assuming t h a t rooms t y p i c a l l y have phones i n them. W e can now i n t e g r a t e the f a c t t h a t J a c k i s at; t h e phone i n t o t h e telephoning frame, assuniq t h a t t h i s s t a t e i s e x p l i c i t l y mentioned t h e r e ( i . e . we h o w t h a t a s p a r t o f telephoning t h e A a m must be AT t h e TEUPHONE). With t h i s added o w TELEPHONING statement w i l l now be:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "TEBPHONE-1) i n t o t h e", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(TELEPHONING (AGENT . JACK-1 ) (TELEPHONE . TELEPHONE-1))", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "TEBPHONE-1) i n t o t h e", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "wnen cne secona Arne cumerr AII 1~e must see how t h i s f i t s i n t o t h e TELEPHONING frame, but this i s a problem of i n t e g r a t i o n Zf we a r e t o l d t h a t J a c k i s i n a r e s t a u r a n t we must a c t i v a t e RESTAURANTING. 1 T o u r c u r r q n t a n a l y s i s (RESTAURANT (THING", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "TEBPHONE-1) i n t o t h e", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "OBJECT frame and hence w i l l o n l y be looking for LOCATIONS i n which t h e r e s t a u r a n t w i l l f i t . Hence i n t h i s c a s e t h e I N frame must a c t l i k e t h e GO frame i n looking f o r ACTION i n d e c i e s i n which it might f i t .", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "RESTAURANT-I)) w i l l n o t d o t h i s s i n c e i t i s an", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "More g e n e r a l l y , any state which i s t y p i c a l l y modsffed by a n a c t i o n should cause us The car was green. Jack had to be home by t hrce .", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "RESTAURANT-I)) w i l l n o t d o t h i s s i n c e i t i s an", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "would happen because t h e f a c t that t h e c a r i s g r e e n would not i n t e g r a t e i n t o DRIVING.) However. much t p my s u r p r i s e , when I gave t h i s example t o peOople t h e y d i d not g e t t h e DRIVING frame e i t h e r . Hoyever, w i t h a modified example t h e y do.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "I n this example the above algorithm w i l l not consider DRIVrNG because GREEN w i l l not demand t h a t we l o o k a t t h e a c t i o n index a s s o i c a t e d w i t h i t s arguments ( t h e c a r ) . (Even i f i t d i d nothing", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The s t e e r i n g wheel was g r e e n . Jack had t o be home by t h r e e . This i s most mysterious. One s u g g e s t i o n (Lehnert personal communication) i s t h a t t o \"see\" t h e s t e e r i n g wheel t h e \"viewer\" must be i n t h e c a r . which i n t u r n suggests d r i v i n g ( s i n c e I N would demand a c t i o n i n t e g r a t i o n ) . T h i s may indeed be c o r r e c t , but we must t%en ex p l a i n why i n t h e f i r st example t h e k c t t h a t t h e viewer must be NEAR t h e car does n o t cause t h e same t h i n g . In any c a s e however, t h e s e examples a r e s u f f i c i e n t l y odd that i t seems i n a d v i s a b l e t o mold a t h e o r y around them.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "I n this example the above algorithm w i l l not consider DRIVrNG because GREEN w i l l not demand t h a t we l o o k a t t h e a c t i o n index a s s o i c a t e d w i t h i t s arguments ( t h e c a r ) . (Even i f i t d i d nothing", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "There i s one way i n which t h e telephone example makes t h e problem look simplgr than i t i s . The woman waved t h e man on t h e s t a g e sawed h e r i n h a l f . Here i t would seem t h a t t h e n o t i o n o f sawing a person i n h a l f $ 8 t h e c r u t~a l concept which l e a d s u s t o magic, although t h e f a c t t h a t t h e woman does not seem conc2rned. and t h e e n t i r e t h i n g i s happening on a s t a g e c e r t a i n l y h e l p re-enforce t h i s idea.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "MORE COMPLEX 1NDT.C ES", |
| "sec_num": "5" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "But p r e s u l a b l y t h e output o f our parser w l l l simply s t a t e t h a t we have here a n If i t were a MOVE w i t h t h e EARTH a s t h e t h i n g moved then EARTHQUAKE.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "MORE COMPLEX 1NDT.C ES", |
| "sec_num": "5" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Note however that i f there were few enough t h i n g s a t t a c h e d t o SAWING our n e t would not save s i g n i f i c a n t t i m e . ", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "MORE COMPLEX 1NDT.C ES", |
| "sec_num": "5" |
| } |
| ], |
| "back_matter": [ |
| { |
| "text": "J a c k went t o a restaurant;. The menu was i n Chinese. \"What w i l l I do now\", thought Jack.Our rules h e r e w i l l g e t us t a RBSTAURANTING a f t e r t h e f i r s t l i n e . But if we are t o understand t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e l a s t l i n e we mwt r e a l i z e t h e import o f l i n e two; Jack c a n ' t read the menu. It would seem u n l i k e l y Lhat RESTAURANTING would a s k about t h e language o f t h e menu, hence sentence tw cannot b e immediately i n t e g r a t e d i n t o RESTAURANTING.More reasonable would be t o know t h a t i f sowething i s i n a foreign language i t cannot b e read, and one normally r e a d s t h e menu so one can order.Only t h e second of t h e s e can p l a u s i b l y be included i n RESTAURANTINC.Given: our algorithm t h e following w i l l occur. The second l i n e w i l l become something l i k e (IN-LANGUAGE MENU-1 CHINESE). Since t h e statement i s n o t i n t e g r a t e d we look t o see i f t h e r e i s a n ACTION p o i n t e r on IN-LANGUAGE.Indeed there i s , and it will be t o the following r u l e . (READ (MOTIVATIONAL-ACTIVITY) VARS: . . .", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "annex", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(ANDIn effectdwe a r e saying h e r e t h a t t h e t y p i c a l s i g n f i c a n c e o f something being i n ,a c e r t a i n lailguage i s whether a person can read it o r not. ' Ph.fs w i l l , cause us t o a c t i v a t v e the READ frame. I n i t i a l l y t h e r e i s l i t t l e else we can do s i n c e a t this point t h e we do not even know who i s trymirig t o read. However when we t r y t o i n t e g r a t e READ we noted t h a t by using t h i s method we a r e e l i m i n a t i n g one o f t h e b e n e f i t s o f a p r i m i t i v e a n a l y s i sw e can no longer assune that we can g e t our information i n a piecemeal fashion and come o u t with t h e same a n a l y s i s . In p a r t i h i l a r we must g e t \" a i s l e \" , o r else t~e must g e t a l l of i t s components a t t h e same time.If w e do not then t h e d i s c r i m i n a t i o n n e t w i l l f a i l t o n o t i c e t h a t we d o not have any old path, we have an AISLE.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "EVENT:", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "A p r i m i t i v e decomposition j u s t becomes a long name f o r a higher l e v e l concept.Or t o t u r n t h i s around, the use o f high l e v e l d i s c r i p t Fahlman, S. E., A system for r e p r e s e n t i n g and using r eal-world knowledge. ", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Given t h i s r e s t r i c t i o n t h e p r i m i t i v e and non p r i m i t i v e a n a l y s e s come out p r e t t y much t h e same.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "bib_entries": {}, |
| "ref_entries": { |
| "FIGREF1": { |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": "But a more immediate d i f f i c d g y are thoee s i t u a t i o n s where B s t o r y dealq w i t h B -11 d e f i n e d t o p i c , y e t never e x p l i c i t l y mentioqs i t . So consider : The mrdan m v e d 8s t h e man on the stage sawed her iq h a l f . lkre w lave no d i f f i c u l t y i n guesaing t b t this IP a magic t r i c k . a l t h o u g h n o t h i n g o f t h e s o r t h&s been mentioned. W e a r e a b l e t o t a k e \"low level'' f a c t s concerning sawing, s t a g e s , etc and put them together in a h i g h e r l w e l \"magician\" hypothesis. As such, t h e phenomena i l l u s t r a t e d here *is e s s e n t i a l y bottom up. Of course, any t i m e we t r j t o i n f e r r e l a t i v e l y g l o b a l p r o p e~t f e s from more local evidence we may make mistakeo. ' h a t t h i s creates problem6 i n frame d e t e r m i n a t i b n i s Shown 4y the n i c e example o f C o l l i n s e t . a l e ( f o r t h c o m i n g ) . {To p)et t h e f u l l tmport o f t h e example, t r y pausing b r i e f l y a f t e r each sentence.) He plunked down $5 at: &he wLndaw. She tried t o g i v e him $2.50 but he ltefused .to t&e i t . So when t h e y g o t i n s i d e she b o a h i t him m large bag of popcorn. The f i r s t l i n e is uniformly i n t e r p r e t e d a s a buying , a c t (most even going furtheq end assuaing somethirift l i k e a b e t a t a r a c e t r a c k } -The secorad l i n e is then seen a s a return o l c)lsnge, but t h e r e f u s a l i s problematic. The t h i r d t i n e r e s o l v e s a l l o f t h i s by s q g e s t i n g a d a t e tat t h e movies -. a c o n s i d e r a b l e r e v i s i o n o f t h e I n i t i a l hypothesis." |
| }, |
| "FIGREF2": { |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": "d o wet d o t h e bottom up proc$?ssing t o f i n d i t ? 3) I f we a r e lead ~rrtrity i n t h e course of (2). how do w e c o r r e c t o u r s e l v e s an the b a s i s o f f u r t h e r evidence." |
| }, |
| "FIGREF3": { |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": "and W l i n s et. a 1 (forthcmming) i n t h a t a frame will be s e l e c t e d on the b a s i s o f l o c a l evidence, and c o r r e c t i o w w i l l be made i" |
| }, |
| "FIGREF4": { |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": "e r s e c t t h e p o s s i b l e frames a s s o c i a t e d with each clua. To s& how t h i s might work l e t us Sake a c l o s e 1-k a t t h e following example A s Jack waawd down t h e aisle he put a can o f t u n a f i s h i n h i s basket." |
| }, |
| "FIGREF5": { |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": "The d e t a i l s of t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n do not f i g u r e i n the p a p e r , and t h o s e which do a r e f a i r l y uncontroversial. An exception here i s the we o f s p e c i f i c p r e d i c a t e s l i k e BASKET o r AISLE. W e dl1 r e t u r n to this point f n t h e conclusion. Given t h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i o n we can imagine one method o f finding the a p p r o p r i a t e frame. Our clues a r e the v a r i o u s predicate6 i n t h e i n p u t , such as as AISLE, BASKET, etc. Index under each csf them all be p o i n t e r s t o those places where i t canes up. Under AISLE we m i @ t find CHURCH, THEATER, and SUPERMARKET, while BASKET w i l l have LLTTU-RED-RID1 NG-HOOD, and" |
| }, |
| "FIGREF6": { |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": "we w i l l hand over t o t h e c l u e r e s o l u t i o n component, and i n what o r d e r . Sr, i n t h e l a s t e%ample I s e l e c t e d some o f t h e c w t e n t o f the sentence t o hand over to t h e c l u e r e s o l v e r , i n p a r t i c u l a r AISLE, and BASKET." |
| }, |
| "FIGREF7": { |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": "s basket. But i f we do not s t o p a Bentence b o w d r i e s where do we s t o p ? It i s r i d i c u l o u s t o go t h r o q h t h e e n t i r e s t o r y col*lectinp; c l u e s and then do a grand i n t e r s e e t i o n a t t & end A reasonably n a t u r a l s o l u t i o n t o the clue s e l e c t i o n problem h u l d s t a r t with t h e o b s e r v a t i o n that u s u a l l y we a l r e a d y have a g e n e r a l frame. When new clues come i n f~e s e e i f t h e y are c m p a t i b l e with what we a l r e a d y believe. I f so, f i n e . I f n o t , we see i f t h e c l u e s y~g e s t s a d i f f e r e n t context frame. If not ( a s with, Say, WALK which occures so o f t e n a s t o be unsuggestive) then nothlny: more need be done. Tf t h e r e a r e newljc suggested context frames t h e y shdyld be i n v e s t i g a t e d . This w i l l be done f o r every p r e d i c a t e . Now t h e c l u e i n t e r s e c t i o n grkthod i s compatible m t h t h i s i d e a , but i n dlts broad o u t l i n e we are moving c l o s e r t o what I have been c h a r a c t e r i z i n g a s the Minsky proposal." |
| }, |
| "FIGREF8": { |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": "s w g e s t i v e . Consider t h e following example J a c k took a can o f t u n a f i s h from t h e s h e l f . Then he turned on a l i g h t . After t h e f i r s t l i n e the i n t e r s e c t i o n method shoufi l e a v e us undecided between KITCHEEJand SUPERMARKET. The next l i n e should r e s o l v e t h e i s s u e , but how i s i t tmt i t does so? It must have something t o do with t h e f a c t t h a t normally a shopper at a s t o r e would not be t h e petson to t u r n l i g h t s vn o r o f f , while i t would be p e r f e c t l y normal f o r Jack t o do i t i n whaX presunably i s h i s own k i t c h e n . But t h i s s o r t o f reasoning i s n o t e a s i l y modeled by c l * I n t e r s e c t i o n because i t m u l d seem t o depend on making i n f e r e n c e s which" |
| }, |
| "FIGREF9": { |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": "As such i t behoves us t o c o n s i d e r why he then r e j e c t e d t h e i d e a i n(Fahlman 1977).Kis primary reason i s h i s o b s e r v a t i o h that f r e q u e n t l y i n v i s i o n one d o e s n o t Rave q p l n g l e c l u e which could s e r v e a s t h e b a s i s f o r the f i r s t g u e s s a t t h e a p p r o p r i a t e frame. Rather i t would seem that one has a m u l t i t u t e o f v e r y vague f e a t u r e s , each one o f which could belong t o a wide v a r i e t y o f o b j e c t s o r scenes. To s e l e c t one o f them f o r a f i r s t g u e s s would be q u i t e a r b i t r a r y and would involve one i n a n i n c r e d i b l e amount o f backtrack. It would seem much more p l a u s i b l e t o s i h p l y d o an i n t e r s e c t i o n on the c l u e s and i n t h i s way weed o u t t h e obvious i m p l a u s i b i l ites . While t h i s a n a a y s i s o f t h e s i t u a t i o n in v i s i o n i s q u i t e p l a u s i b i l e . I e s t i m a t e t h a t high l e v e l v i s i o n i s s t i l l i n a s u f f i c i e n t l y rudinrentar y s t a t e t h a t t h e s e c o n c l u s i o n s need not be taken as a n y t h i n g m a r t h e f i n a l word. Furthermore, even if i t were proved t h a t v i s i o n d o e s need a? i n t e r s e c t i o n type p r o c e s s , I can e a s i l y b e l i e v e t h a t t h e process which g o e s on i n v i s i o n i s n o t t h e aame a s t h a t which goes on i n langusqe. For one t h i n g ih v i s i o n t h e r e i s a n a t u r a l cut-off for c l u e s e l e c t i o nthe s i n g l e scene. For a n o t h e r , w i t h i n t h e scene t h e r e i s ci n a t u r a l metric on t h e l i k e l y n e s s o f t m f e a t u r e s belonging t o t h e same framed i s t a n c e . Weither or not thege i n f a c t m r k i n v i s i o n . t h e y do suggest why someone p r i m a r i l y worried about t h e v i s i o n problem m u l d not s e e c l u e s e l e c t r o n a s t h e problem-it a p p e a r s t o be i n language.3 DII'FERENT KINDS OF INDICESA s I have a l r e a d y s a i d , t h e scheme I b e l i e v e :an surl'nodnt t h e d i f f i c u l i t i e s presented i n t h e Last secticnr i s a v a r i a n t on one proposed by Urrsky , and e l a b o r a t e d by Fahlman ( 1974) andKuipers (1975). The b a s i c i d e a i s t h a t one majar f e a t u r e o r c l u e is used t o s e l e c t a n i n i t i d l frame. Other facts a r e t h e n i n t e r p r e t e d i n l i g h t 3 f t h i s frame.If t h e y f i t , f i n e . I f ncat then another frame mur;t, r e p l a c e s t h e o r i g i n e l frame. In t h e previous p r o p o l s a l s t h e o r i g i n a l frame contained i n f o r m a t i o n about a 1 t e r n a t e frames t o be t o m p a t a b i l i t i e s .T h i s may o r may n o t work i n v i s f o n (vhich was t h e primary concern o f t h o s e mentioned e a r l i e r ) however I s h a l l d r o p t h i s p a r t o f t h e theory. I n dLscourse t h e r e a r e simply t o o many ways a frame can be i n a p p r o p r i a t e t o make t h i s f e a s i b l e d i b i l i t y t o b e l i e v e that: SUPIsRMARKEI' would suggest l o o k i n g a t UTCHFN rn t h e c a s e t h e shgpper t u r n s on t h e i i p ; h t s ." |
| }, |
| "FIGREF10": { |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": "d o t h i s ' WL? l o o k t o see what we have indexed under TELEPHO~&, f i n d TELEPHONING, and t r y t h a t o u t . Indeed i t # w i l l work q u i t e well, s i n c e o n e o f t h e t h i n g s under." |
| }, |
| "FIGREF11": { |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": "Nothing 1s e v e r r e a l l y t h i s simple however, and even i n t h i s example, which h a s been s e l e c t s u s p e c t most people have a s a m e d i n t h e course o f t h i s example t h a t J a c k i s i n a room, and perhaps have even gone so f a r as t o assume he is a t home-Nothing i n t h e s t o r y s a y s s o o f c o u r s e , and i f t h e next l i n e went on t o s a y t t t J a c k put a dime i n t o t h e phone we would q u i c k l y r e v i s e our theory.To account f b r our tendencydto p l a c e J a c k i n room, we must have a second index under TELEPHONE which p o i n t s t o p l a c e s where phones a r e t y p t c a l l y found. ( A n p o s s i b l e a l t e r n a t i v e is t o have t h i s s t a t e d under TELEPHONING but t h i s would make i t d i f f i c u l t t o use t h e %nformation i n c a s e s where no c a l l is a c t u a l i f h y p o t h e s i z e d , would not staw around 3ong.) So tff w i l l hypothesize two k i n d s 0 4 i n d i c e s , a n ACTION index and a LOCATION index. T h i s r d i s t i n c t i o n should m i r r o r t h e i n t u i t i v e d i f f e r e n c e between p l a c i n e and o b j e c t in a t y p i c a l l o c a l and p l a c i n g an a c t i o n i n a t y p i c a l sequent#. Other d i s t i n c t i o n s o f t h i s sorg e x i s t and may w e L l l e a d t o the i n $ r o d u c t l o n o f o t h e r such i n d k t y p e s l o c a t i n g o b j e c t s and a c t i o n s i n time fbr example. However I would a n t i c i p a t e t h a t t h e t o t a l number is s m a l l (under 10. s a y ) . To i l l u s t r a t e how t h e s e index t y p e s might hook up t o TELEPHONE I w i l l use a s l i g h t l y ex tended v e r s i o n o f t h e frame r e p r e s e n t a t i o n introduced i n (Charniak 1977) and (Charniak forthcornming). From t h e p o i n t o f view o f t h i s paper nothing i s dependent on t h i s choice. It i s simply t o g i v e us a s e p e c i f i c notat* M t h which t o work, So l e t us c o n s i d e r a v e r y s i m p l e example. J a c k r s l k e d over t o t h e phone. H e had t? t a l k t o B i l l . (TELEPHONE (OBJECT) ;The frame d e s c r i b e s a n OBJECT ; (and not , s a y , a n event ) . VARS:(THING) ,I o n l y i n t r o d u c e one v a r i a b l e . L o ;THING which i s bound t o t h e;token i n t h e s t o r y repre-, s e n t i n g t h e phone &NATION: ( (ROOM (HOME-PHONE . THING) ) (PUBLIC-LOC ( PAY-PHONE . THING) ) )" |
| }, |
| "FIGREF12": { |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": "ACTION: ( (TELEPHONING (PHONE . THING)) ) . ..) ,Other p o r t i o n s o f t h e frame would ; d e s c r i b e i t s appearance, etc . W e w i l l not be a b l e t o integrate t h e f i r s t l i n e o f our s t o r y i n t o any o t h e r frame, s o we w i l l hypothesize the TEUPHONINC frame and e i t h e r t h e raom frame o r the p u b l i c place frame. Given my s u b j e c t d a t a on wh8t people assume, t h e room frame i s placed, and hence t r i e d , f i r st. This will cause the c r e a t i o n o f two new s t a t e m e n t s which s e r v e t o s p e c i f y t h e frames now a c t i v e , and t h e i r bindings" |
| }, |
| "FIGREF13": { |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": "by d o t t e d p a i r s (VARLABLE , BINDING). E a r l i e r I used a p l a c e n o t a t i o n f o r s i m p l i c i t y , e.g., In f a c t t h i s would be converted i n t e r n a l l y t o the d o t t e d p a i r format: (TELEPHONE (THING . TELEPHONE-1 ) ) I might n o t e t h a t my v a r i a b l e s a r e what Minsky (1975) c a l l e s \"slots\". Th'ey a r e a l s o e q u i v a l e n t ( t o a f i r s t appruxirnation) t o KRL s l o t s such a s HONE-PHONE i n ." |
| }, |
| "FIGREF14": { |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": ". The frame d e t e r m i n a t i o n problem i s o v e r f o r t h i s exam~le. CONSTRAINTS ON THE HYPOTHESIS OF NEW FRAMES E s r l y o n w e noted t h a t i t w a g o n l y n e c e s s a r y t o worry about a new frame i f we r e c e i v e d information which did n o t f i t i n t h e o l d ones. Then when w e introduced t h e two kinds of i n d e c r e s we noted t h a t we wanted t o p l a c e e v e n t s i n a sequence o f e v e n t s , and o b j e c t s i n t h e i r mica1 l o c a l . q i s immediately s u g g e s t s t h a t when w get a n unintecgratable a c t i o n we use t h e ACTION index on t h e predicate, while f o r o b j e c t s w e would use t h e LOCATION index. However, t h i s i s not: g e n e r a l enough i n a t l e a s t two ways. For one t h i n g , o f t e n we w i l l have a non-integratable a c t i o n where i t i s not t h e a c t i o n frame, b u t r a t h e r t h e o b j e c t s inmxved iii the a c t i o n which suggest t h e a p p r o p r i a t e frame. Our example o f someone going over t o a phone i s a c a s e i n p o i n t . Here GO t e l l s us n o t h i n g , but TELEPHONE i s q u i t e suggestive. To handle t h i s t h e s e a r c h f o r ACTION i n d i c e s must i n c l u d e those which a r e on OBJECT frames d e s c r i b i n g t h e tokens involved i n the a c t i o n . So s i n c e J a c k i s going t o something which is a telephone, we l o o k on t h e ACTION i n d e t a f TELEPHONE. W e must a l s o extend o m a n a l y s i s t o handle s t a t e s ." |
| }, |
| "FIGREF15": { |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": "t o l o o k f o r ACTION i n d i c i e s . So INorSTICKY-ON would d o s o , SOLID o r AGE would n o t . (But i f ib the c a s e a t hand we are t o l d t h a t something d i d change t h e SOLID s t a t u s t h e n we would treat i t Like an a c t i o n , a s i n \"In t h e morning t h e water i n t h e pond was s o l i d f t . Up t o t h i s point t h e n t h e frame s e l e c t i o n process looks l i k e t h i s : 1) When a statement comes i n t r y t o i n t e g r a t e i t i n t o t h e fxames which a r e a l r e a d y a c t i v e . I n g e n e r a l t h i s can r e q u i r e i n f e r e n c e and a major open problem i s 4ow much i n f e r e n c e g r a t i o n i,s s u c c e s s f u l , t h e n go on to t h e next stat em el^^. 2 ) I f -t h e statement i s a d e s c r i p t i o n o f a n orbjeet ( i . e . a n OBJECT frame) t h e n ulae t h e LOCATSON index on t h e frame t o find a \"'frame which i n c o r p o r a t e s t h e statement. Keep t r a c k of yet u n t r i e d suggested LOCATION frames. 3) I f t h e s t a t e m v t i s a n a c t i o n o r changable s t a t e , then l o o k f o r a n ACTION frame i n t o which t h e a c t i o n ( o r state) c a n be i n t e g r a t e d . F i r s t l o o k o n t h e frame f o r t h e a c t i o n ( o r e t a t e ) and then on Lhe o b j e c t fqames d e s c r i b i n g t h e arguments o f t h e a c t i o n ( o r s t a t e ) . Again, keep t r a c k af any remaining ones. 4) There must be a complicated process by which we test frames f o r c o n s i s t a n c y @i t h what we know about t h e s t o r y a l r e a d y . I f i t i s n o t c o n s i s t a n t we must i n v o l v e a n even more complicated process o f d e c i d i n g which i s more b e l i e v a b l e , previous h y p q t h e s i s about t h e s t o r y , o r t h e c u r r e n t frame. I have nothing t o s a y on t h i s a s p e c t o f t h e problem. There i s however one type o f example which r a i s e s some doubts about t h e above algorithm. These mention some o b j e c t rSith a s s o c i a t e d ACTION frames, b u t o n l y i n connection with s t a t e s which d-o not demand an ACTION frame f o r t h e i r i n t e g r a t i o n . For example:" |
| }, |
| "FIGREF16": { |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": "In the case o f TELEPHONE i t seems reasonable t o have a d i r e c t l i n k between the o b j e c t TELEPHONE and the context frame TELEPHONING. In o t h e r c a s e s t h i s i s n o t s o c l e a r . For example, w e carrier consider t h e example:" |
| }, |
| "FIGREF17": { |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": "i n c i d e n t o f SAWING. Does t h i s mean t h a t we have* under SAWING a pointer t o MAGIC-PERFORMANCE' A t f i r s t g l a n c e t h i s seems odd a t b e s t . Some o t h e r examples where t h e same p r o b l m a r i s e are: The ground shook. (EARTHQUAKE) (Example due t o J. DeJong) There were t i n c a n s and streamers t i e d t o t h e c a r . ( WEDDXNG) There were p i e c e s o f t h e f u s i l a g e s c a t t e r e d on t h e ground. (ALRPLANE ACCIDENT) In the f t n a l a n a l y s i s t h e r e a l problem h e r e i s one o f e f f i c i e n c y . I f , f o r example we a t t a c h EARTHQUAKE t o EARTH, then we w i l l be loolcing a t it i n many e i r c m s t a n c e s when i t i s n o t a p p l i c a b l e . (The a l t e r n a t i v e o f a t t a c h i n g i t t o SHAKE i s l i t t l e b e t t e r , and p o s s i b l y worse s i n c e i t would not handle \"Jack f e l t t h e e a r t h MOW3 beneath him\" assumiw the average person g e t s EARTHQUAKE o u t o f t h i s a l s o .) One way t o c u t down t h e n m b e r o f f a l s e suggestions i s t o complicate t h e i n d i c e s we have on each frame. So far t h e y have simply been l i s t s o f p o s s i b i l i t i e s . Suppose w e make them d i s c r i m i n a t i o n n e t s . So, under SAWING we would have v a r i o u s tests. On one branch would appear MAGIC-PERFORNANCE, b a t we would o n l y g e t t o i t a f t e r many tests, o n e o f which would s e e i f t h e t h i n g s a k d was a person. I n much t h e same way t h e d i s c r i m i n a t i o n n e t f o r EARTH cou3.d e n q u i r e about t h e a c t i o n o r s t a t e which caused us t o a c c e s s i t ." |
| }, |
| "FIGREF18": { |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": "Even i f we were t o a c c e s s t h e MAGIC-PERFORMANCE frame t h e f i r s t t h i n g w e would d o is check t h a t t h e t h i n g proposed f o r t h e SAWED-PERSON v a r i a b l e was indeed a person. The n e t o n l y s a v e s t i m e when a s i n g l e test i n t h e n e t rules o u t a number o f frames. A t t h e present t i m e I have n o t thought o f enough frames a s s o c i a t e d with SAWING t o make t h i s worth while. But a s 3 1 suspect t h i s i s p r i m a r i l y do t o l a c k o f work o n my p a r t . I w i l a assme t h a t d i s c r i m i n a t i o n n e t s w i l l be required. I f we a l l o w a d i s c r i m i n a t i o n n e t t o a s k a r b i t r a r y q u e s t i o n s there w i l l be the problem t h a t i t may a s k q u e s t i o n s which a r e n o t y e t answered i n t h e s t o r y . Mowever a reasonable r e s t r i c t i o n which would prevent t h i s would go a s follows. Suppose statement A causes us t o l o o k a t frames o n a n indac of B. The d i s c r i m i n a t i o n n e t may o n l y enquire about t h e p r e d i c a t e o f A (EARTH l o o k s to see i f A was a MOVE:), and what o b j e c t frames d e s c r i b e t h e arguments o f A o r B (SAW Itooks t o see i f t h e t h i n g s a t e d was a PERSON). 6 OTMR USES OF F W E DETERMINATION E a r l i e r I noted t h a t i n t e g r a t i n g a statement i n t o a frame r e q u l r q s i n f e r e n c e . Here I would l i k e t o point o b t t h a t B m o d i f i c a t i o n o f t h e above i d e a s would be helpful: in t h i s process a s well. Consider t h e following :" |
| } |
| } |
| } |
| } |
