zlacker

[return to "Cyc"]
1. stereo+Is[view] [source] 2019-12-13 17:13:35
>>mdszy+(OP)
Knowledge bases should work in principle. There are many issues with filling them manually: a) the schema/ontology/conceptual framework is not guaranteed to be useful especially when done with no specific application in mind b) high cost of adding each fact with little marginal benefit etc. But I don't think it outweighs the issues of "pure" machine learning that much: poor introspection, capricious predictability of what you will get, and if you want to have really structured and semi-reliable information you will probably have to rely, at some point, on something like Wikipedia meta-information (DBpedia). Which is really a knowledge base with its own issues.

I think what really stopped Cyc from getting a wider traction is its closed nature[0]. People do use Princeton WordNet, which you can get for free, even though it's a mess in many aspects. The issue and mentality here is similar to commercial Common Lisp implementations, and the underlying culture is similar (oldschool 80s AI). These projects were shaped with a mindset that major progress in computing will happen with huge government grants and plans[1]. However you interpret the last 30 years, it was not exactly true. It's possible that all these companies earn money for their owners, but they have no industry-wide impact.

I was half-tempted once or twice to use something like Cyc in some project, but it would probably be too much organizational hassle. Especially if it turned out to be something commercial I wouldn't want to be dependent on someone's licensing and financial whims, especially if it can be avoided.

[0] There was OpenCyc for a time, but it was scrapped.

[1] Compare https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20569098

◧◩
2. emw+uF[view] [source] 2019-12-13 18:41:53
>>stereo+Is
> if you want to have really structured and semi-reliable information you will probably have to rely, at some point, on something like Wikipedia meta-information (DBpedia).

Wikidata is also worth considering for that task. It is:

* Directly linked from Wikipedia [1]

* The data source for many infoboxes [2]

* Seeded with data from Wikipedia

* More active and integrated in community

* Larger in total number of concepts

Wikidata also has initiatives in lexicographic data [3] and images [4, 5].

On the subject of Cyc: the CycL "generalization" (#$genls) predicate inspired Wikidata's "subclass of" property [6], which now links together Wikidata's tree of knowledge.

---

1. See "Wikidata" link at left in all articles, e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_base

2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Infobox_templates_usi...

3. https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Lexicographical_data/...

4. https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Wikimedia_Commons/Dev...

5. See "Structured data" tab in image details on Wikimedia Commons, e.g. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mona_Lisa,_by_Leonar...

6. https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property_talk:P279#Archived_cr...

[go to top]