PEOPLE FRIEND ADVISOR BASED ON INTERESTS AND DAILY ROUTINES 1 By: Mehdi Rohaninezhad National University of Malaysia(UKM) Feb 10, 2012.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
McKinney isd GT Elementary Program McKinney ISD exists to provide an excellent education for all.
Advertisements

Helping Families Understand What Is Happening In the Classroom The more a program or event at school is designed to improve student achievement, the more.
Giving a formal meaning to “Specialization” In these note we try to give a formal meaning to specifications, implementations, their comparisons. We define.
Database Management System Module 3:. Complex Constraints In this we specify complex integrity constraints included in SQL. It relates to integrity constraints.
ArchE Presented By Samanvitha Ramayanam. TOPICS 1. Introduction 2. Theoretical assumptions 3. ArchE as an expert system 4. Overall flow of ArchE 5. Key.
Fall Semantics Juan Carlos Guzmán CS 3123 Programming Languages Concepts Southern Polytechnic State University.
Deploying a Distributed Symposium Planner Through Rule Responder Harold Boley Benjamin Craig Institute for Information Technology National Research Council,
1 Draft of a Matchmaking Service Chuang liu. 2 Matchmaking Service Matchmaking Service is a service to help service providers to advertising their service.
Proof System HY-566. Proof layer Next layer of SW is logic and proof layers. – allow the user to state any logical principles, – computer can to infer.
© C. Kemke1Reasoning - Introduction COMP 4200: Expert Systems Dr. Christel Kemke Department of Computer Science University of Manitoba.
CS 330 Programming Languages 09 / 16 / 2008 Instructor: Michael Eckmann.
Semi-Automatic Learning of Transfer Rules for Machine Translation of Low-Density Languages Katharina Probst April 5, 2002.
Artificial Intelligence Chapter 17 Knowledge-Based Systems Biointelligence Lab School of Computer Sci. & Eng. Seoul National University.
First Grade Unit: Introduction. First Grade Introduction Unit Objectives: PE.1.PR.4.1 Use basic strategies and concepts for working cooperatively in group.
THE MODEL OF ASIS FOR PROCESS CONTROL APPLICATIONS P.Andreeva, T.Atanasova, J.Zaprianov Institute of Control and System Researches Topic Area: 12. Intelligent.
INEL 3105 Electrical Systems Analysis Electrical and Computer Engineering Department University of Puerto Rico at Mayagüez.
WellnessRules: The Activity Rule Responder Taylor Osmun Harold Boley Benjamin Craig Institute for Information Technology National Research Council, Canada.
Harold Boley, Adrian Paschke, and Tara Athan (RuleML Initiative)RuleML Initiative The 6th International Symposium on Rules: Research Based and Industry.
Programming Languages
Evaluating Centralized, Hierarchical, and Networked Architectures for Rule Systems Benjamin Craig University of New Brunswick Faculty of Computer Science.
SymposiumPlanner-2011: Querying Two Virtual Organization Committees Zhili Zhao, Adrian Paschke, Chaudhry Usman Ali, and Harold Boley Corporate Semantic.
Principles of the SymposiumPlanner Instantiations of Rule Responder Zhili Zhao, Adrian Paschke, Chaudhry Usman Ali, and Harold Boley Corporate Semantic.
TRANSLATOR: A TRANSlator from LAnguage TO Rules David Hirtle David R. Cheriton School of Computer Science University of Waterloo (Work done at the University.
1 Expert Finding for eCollaboration Using FOAF with RuleML Rules MCeTECH May 2006 Jie Li 1,2, Harold Boley 1,2, Virendrakumar C. Bhavsar 1, Jing.
The 7th International Web Rule Symposium: Research Based and Industry Focused (RuleML 2013) July 11-13, 2013, Seattle, USA.
Expert Querying and Redirection with Rule Responder FEWS-2007, 12 Nov 2007 Harold Boley 1, Adrian Paschke 2 1 National Research Council of Canada University.
1 Rule-based Social Networking for Expert Finding Presented by: Jie Li 1,2 Supervisors: Dr. Harold Boley 1,2 Dr. Virendrakumar C. Bhavsar 1 1 University.
Distributed Rule Responder Querying on the Semantic Web Harold Boley Institute for Information Technology National Research Council, Canada Fredericton,
Social Semantic Rule Sharing and Querying in Wellness Communities Harold Boley, Taylor Osmun, Benjamin Craig Institute for Information Technology, National.
UML-Based Rule Modeling Language REWERSE Working Group I1 Brandenburg University of Technology Strelka – An URML Modeling Tool The Strelka tool supports.
Harold Boley 1, Omair Shafiq 2, Derek Smith 3, Taylor Osmun 3 1 Institute for Information Technology, National Research Council Canada, Fredericton, NB,
Rule Responder Agents in Virtual Organizations Harold Boley Benjamin Craig Institute for Information Technology National Research Council, Canada Fredericton,
Advanced topics in software engineering (Semantic web)
RE-SEED Training Inquiry Based Learning Workshop.
1 The OO jDREW Reference Implementation of RuleML RuleML-2005, November 2005 Marcel Ball 1, Harold Boley 2, David Hirtle 1,2, Jing Mei 1,2, Bruce.
Inga ZILINSKIENE a, and Saulius PREIDYS a a Institute of Mathematics and Informatics, Vilnius University.
From POSL to d-POSL: Making the Positional-Slotted Language Defeasible Advisors: Nick Bassiliades, Efstratios Kontopoulos Instructor: Dr. Harold Boley.
SEMANTIC AGENT SYSTEMS Towards a Reference Architecture for Semantic Agent Systems Applied to Symposium Planning Usman Ali.
Wellness-Rules: A Web 3.0 Case Study in RuleML-Based Prolog-N3 Profile Interoperation Harold Boley Taylor Osmun Benjamin Craig Institute for Information.
Essential Strategies: a teacher should carry out in order to have a well managed classroom and avoid problems within the classroom.
MDD approach for the Design of Context-Aware Applications.
Rule Responder Agents for Distributed Query Answering Harold Boley Benjamin Craig Taylor Osmun Institute for Information Technology National Research Council,
RuleML Rules Lite Harold Boley, NRC IIT e-Business Said Tabet, Macgregor Corp With Key Contributions from the Joint Committee DAML PI Meeting, Captiva.
Rule Responder: A Multi-Agent Web Platform for Collaborative Virtual Organizations Based on RuleML and OO jDREW Benjamin Craig University Of New Brunswick.
Rule Responder: An Intelligent Multi-Agent System for Collaborative Teams and Virtual Communities Benjamin Craig Harold Boley Institute for Information.
A. The “Interactive Interview”. How it differs from the typical Social Survey.
ece 627 intelligent web: ontology and beyond
THE HOMEWORK... WHAT’S THE POINT?. GOT TO DO HOMEWORK? Because it’s assigned by the teacher, and will be corrected/graded Because quizzes/exams are kind.
SEMANTIC AGENT SYSTEMS Towards a Reference Architecture for Semantic Agent Systems Applied to Symposium Planning Usman Ali UNB FCS,Fredericton, NB 1.
Deploying a Distributed Symposium Planner Through Rule Responder Benjamin Craig Harold Boley Institute for Information Technology National Research Council,
RuleML Query Answering with Personal OO jDREW Agents in Rule Responder Benjamin Craig Harold Boley Fredericton, NB National Research Council - IIT May.
1 Nov. 2, 2005 Design and Application of Rule Based Access Control Policies Huiying Li, Xiang Zhang, Honghan Wu & Yuzhong Qu Dept. Computer.
1 Propositional Logic Limits The expressive power of propositional logic is limited. The assumption is that everything can be expressed by simple facts.
Preparing Volunteers for School-Based Matches. Our history About friendship Where Matches meet Who are our Littles? About Us: Big Brothers Big Sisters.
The International RuleML Symposium on Rule Interchange and Applications Visualization of Proofs in Defeasible Logic Ioannis Avguleas 1, Katerina Gkirtzou.
1 First Order Logic CS 171/271 (Chapter 8) Some text and images in these slides were drawn from Russel & Norvig’s published material.
UTA/ARRI. Enterprise Engineering for The Agile Enterprise Don Liles The University of Texas at Arlington.
Taylor Osmun Institute for Information Technology National Research Council, Canada Fredericton, NB, Canada 1.
Social Semantic Rule Sharing and Querying in Wellness Communities Harold Boley, Taylor Osmun, Benjamin Craig, Derek Smith Institute for Information Technology,
PZ03CX Programming Language design and Implementation -4th Edition Copyright©Prentice Hall, PZ03CX - Language semantics Programming Language Design.
Artificial Intelligence Logical Agents Chapter 7.
OCR A Level F453: High level languages Programming techniques a. identify a variety of programming paradigms (low-level, object- oriented,
Artificial Intelligence Chapter 17 Knowledge-Based Systems
Knowledge-Based Systems Chapter 17.
Artificial Intelligence Chapter 17 Knowledge-Based Systems
STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION :
Orlando Florida RuleML 2007 Thursday, October 25, 2007
Artificial Intelligence Chapter 17. Knowledge-Based Systems
Artificial Intelligence Chapter 17 Knowledge-Based Systems
A Tutorial Summary of Description Logic and Hybrid Rules
Presentation transcript:

PEOPLE FRIEND ADVISOR BASED ON INTERESTS AND DAILY ROUTINES 1 By: Mehdi Rohaninezhad National University of Malaysia(UKM) Feb 10, 2012

RULE RESPONDER RULE ENGINES Rule Engine Prova : Uses Reaction RuleML to implement agent interaction (behavior), e.g. realizing Organizational Agent (OA ) OO jDREW : Uses Hornlog RuleML to implement reasoning (decisioning), e.g. realizing Personal Agent (PA) DR-Device : Uses DR RuleML to implement defeasible logic 2

PERSON PROFILE person2 Interest DailyRoutines person3 Interest DailyRoutines person1 Interest DailyRoutines person4 Interest DailyRoutines person5 Interest DailyRoutines Each person is a part of society. In this project persons have two main property classes, interest and daily routines. person’s profile: Person(John^ name->John ; knows->[Mary] ; interest.no->4:Integer; address->place[country ->Canada ; city->Vancouver] ; phones->tel[cell->098 ; home->3435]). 3

FROM INTERESTS TO DAILY ROUTINES AND PERSON PROFILE Person Profile HomeInterestJobInterest Job routine Leisure routine Interests Daily Routines 4

RELATED TO: INTERESTS, DAILY ROUTINES AND PERSONS Interest, dailyRoutines and person are three main predicates in this project. They play the role of ground facts. relatedTo is a slotted term in interest predicates, which implies a kind of priority relation between person’s interests. relatedTo is a slotted term in dailyRoutine predicates, which implies a kind of chronological order between person’s daily routines. knows is a Plex term in person predicates, which implies a list of persons who are known directly. 5

INTEREST TAXONOMY 6

INTEREST PROFILE Interests have RDF taxonomy. Person’s interests are related to each other in a priority order. Here is an example of John’s interest profile interest(JackJob^^Teacher^ person->Jack ; class->Teacher; job->JackJobRoutine ; degree-> 1^^Integer ; relatedTo->JackFacebook^^ SocialNetwork). interest(JackFacebook^^ SocialNetwork^ person->Jack ; class->SocialNetwork ; degree-> 2^^Integer ; relatedTo->JackNovel^^Novel). interest(JackNovel^^Novel^ person->Jack ; degree-> 3^^Integer ;class->Novel; relatedTo->JackJogging^^Jogging). interest(JackJogging^^Jogging^ person->Jack ; class->Jogging ; degree-> 4^^Integer ). Teacher SocialNetwork NovelJogging 7

INTEREST PROFILE RULES(1) Rules for generating person interest lists 1- getAllInterestCategories(?p, ?allInterestCategories, ?n^^Integer) :- person(? ^ name->?p ; interest.no->?n^^Integer !?), interestCategorylist(?p, [], ?allInterestCategories, ?n^^Integer). 2- interestCategorylist(?p, ?visited, [], 0^^Integer). interestCategorylist(?p, ?visited, [ ?c| ?rest], ?n^^Integer) :- interest(?i^^Interest ^ person->?p ; class->?c ; degree->?dg !?), greaterThan(?n^^Integer, 0^^Integer), equal (?dg^^Integer,?n^^Integer), subtract(?n1^^Integer, ?n^^Integer,1^^Integer), notMember(?c, ?visited), interestCategorylist(?p, [ ?c| ?visited], ?rest, ?n1^^Integer). 8

INTEREST PROFILE RULES(2)  Query: getAllInterestCategories(Jack, ?allInterestCategories, ?n^^Integer).  OO jDREW TD Result : ?allInterestCategories : [Jogging, Novel, SocialNetwork, Teacher] ?n: 4:Integer 9

DAILY ROUTINE TAXONOMY 10

DAILY ROUTINE PROFILE Daily routines taxonomy is consisted of Job, Leisure activities and Sleeping. They are related with each other in chronological order. Here is the Jack’s daily routines. dailyRoutines(JackJobRoutine^^Teacher ^ person->Jack ; class->Teacher ; duration->time[from->8.30^^Real ; to->16.30^^Real] ; place->pl[UNB,Torento] ; relatedTo->JackLeisureTime^^LeisureTime). % dailyRoutines(JackLeisureTime^^LeisureTime ^ person->Jack ; duration->time[from->18.30^^Real ; to->23.00^^Real]; place->pl[home, club] ; relatedTo->JackSleep^^Sleeping). % dailyRoutines(JackSleep^^Sleeping ^ person->Jack ; duration->time[from->24.00^^Real ; to->7.00^^Real]; place->pl[home]). JobLeisureSleeping 11

ENJOY TIME(1) Enjoy time is a time that a person spend on his/her interests. For a person who is interested in his job, the job time also should be considered. This predicate is implemented via NAF. getEnjoyTime(?p,?time) :- naf(getJobInterest(?p, ?i)), getLeisureTime(?p, ?time). % OR getEnjoyTime(?p,?time) :- getJobInterest(?p, ?i), getLeisureTime(?p, ?time1), getJobTime(?p, ?time2), add(?time^^Real, ?time1^^Real, ?time2^^Real) 12

ENJOY TIME(2)  Query: getEnjoyTime(Mary,?time)  OO jDREW TD Result: ?time 13.7 : Real 13

WORKMATES(1) Another helpful predicate is used for finding workmate list. getWorkmateList(?job, ?visited, [], 0^^Integer). getWorkmateList(?job, ?visited, [?p|?rest], ?n^^Integer) :- greaterThan(?n^^Integer, 0^^Integer), getJob(?job, ?p), subtract(?n1^^Integer, ?n^^Integer,1^^Integer), notMember(?p, ?visited), getWorkmateList(?job, [?p|?visited], ?rest,?n1^^Integer). 14

WORKMATES(2)  Query: getWorkmateList(Teacher, [], ?list, 2^^Integer).  OO jDREW TD Result : ?list[Harry, Jack] 15

FRIEND ADVISOR BASED ON INTERESTS AND LEISURE TIME INTERVAL(1) People may be advised to make a friend based on common interests and leisure time interval. In this case their relation is not considered as an assumption. System offers a time interval for common leisure activities based on their leisure time intersection. System assign a grade for each friendship relation based on common interests(?grade). friendAdviceBaseOnInterests(?p1, ?p2, ?grade, [?lowerBound, ?upperBound]) :- haveIntersectionLeisureTime(?p1,?p2, ?lowerBound, ?upperBound), commonInterest(?p1, ?p2, ?grade). 16

FRIEND ADVISOR BASED ON INTERESTS AND LEISURE TIME INTERVAL(2)  Query: friendAdviceBaseOnInterests(John, ?p2, ?grade, [? lowerBound, ?upperBound]).  OO jDREW TD Result : 17 ?p: Mary ?grade: 2 : Integer ?lowerBound: : Real ?upperBound: : Real ?p: Jack ?grade: 3 : Integer ?lowerBound: 18:30 : Real ?upperBound: : Real ?p: Harry ?grade: 1 : Integer ?lowerBound: : Real ?upperBound: : Real

KNOWS AND FRIENDSHIP FOAF-like knows relation is defined to be symmetric here. If knows(?p1,?p2) Then knows(?p2,?p1). directKnows(?p1,?p2) :- person(?p1^ knows->?list !?), member(?p2,?list). % OR directKnows(?p1,?p2) :- person(?p2^ knows->?list !?), member(?p1,?list). Person’s knows relation satisfies transitivity here as in FOAF. The relation is DIRECT if they know each other or INDIRECT if there is a person who knows them directly. People may know each other but not necessarily have a friendship relation. Mary HarryJohnJack indirectKnows directKnows 18

FRIEND ADVISOR BASED ON INTERESTS AND KNOWING(1)  Two persons may know each other while they are not friends. So they may be advised to try to make friends based on their common activities. In this case person’s relation is considered as an assumption (directly OR indirectly). System assign a grade for any friendship relation based on common interests(?grade). friendAdvice(?p1, ?p2, ?grade) :- indirectKnows(?p1,?p2), commonInterest(?p1, ?p2, ?grade). % OR friendAdvice(?p1, ?p2, ?grade) :- directKnows(?p1,?p2), commonInterest(?p1, ?p2, ?grade). 19

FRIEND ADVISOR BASED ON INTERESTS AND KNOWING(2)  Query: friendAdvice(John, ?p2, ?grade).  OO jDREW TD Result : ?p2 Mary ?grade: 2 ?p2 Jack ?grade: 3 ?p2 Harry ?grade: 1 20

DEFEASIBLE REASONING(1)  One of other crucial reasoning technique is defeasible reasoning which is a reasoning for typical consideration.  POSL is extending towards d-POSL. See also: Fall 2011 Project Team 1 ( From POSL to d-POSL: Making the Positional-Slotted Language Defeasible:  Because of the fact that typically we do not have common interests with the most of persons whom we know, project could be extended towards defeasible reasoning.  At the end of the day d-POSL extension of current POSL grammar is offered. 21

DEFEASIBLE REASONING(2)  Scenario: Between people of whom we know, only a small set we have common interests and activities. Most of them are our friends. 1- strict rule: r1: friend(?x, ?y) :- knows(?x,?y). 2- defeasible rules: r2: knows(?x, ?y) := ~commonInterest(?x, ?y). r3: friend(?x, ?y) := commonInterest(?x, ?y). 3- superiority relation:r3>r2 22

CHANGING D-POSL GRAMMER(1)  The grammar offered by Team1 only cover slotted terms and should be deployed for positional and positional-slotted predicates as well.  Some parts of DPosNew.g grammar’s rule is changed to accept positional-slotted atoms as well. Expr, slot rules are modified and pos is added: expr: ( poses (SEMI slots)? | slots (SEMI poses)? (SEMI slots)? )+ {System.out.println("Expression: " + $expr.text + "\n");} ; 23

CHANGING D-POSL GRAMMER(2) slots: slot (SEMI slot)* ; slot: (sname ARROW svalue) | sname COLON sname ARROW svalue | sname HAT sname COLON sname ARROW svalue {System.out.println("Slot: " + $slot.text + "\n");} ; 24

CHANGING D-POSL GRAMMER(3) poses: pos (COMMA pos)* ; pos: svalue | sname COLON svalue | sname HAT sname COLON svalue {System.out.println("Position: " + $pos.text + "\n");} ; 25

PARSE TREE OF SAMPLE INTERPRETATION 26

TEST RIG OF SAMPLE 1(TEAM1) Rule ID: r1 SName apartment Variable: ?x^^ACCOMMODATION Expression: apartment->?x^^ACCOMMODATION Atom: acceptable(apartment->?x^^ACCOMMODATION) Literal: acceptable(apartment->?x^^ACCOMMODATION) : ( Predicate: carlo:apartment ^ : SName apt845 SName carlo SName age ) Slot: apt845^carlo:age->12 Expression: apt845^carlo:age->12. Atom: carlo:apartment(apt845^carlo:age->12) Literal: carlo:apartment(apt845^carlo:age->12) Condition Cluster: carlo:apartment(apt845^carlo:age->12) Body: carlo:apartment(apt845^carlo:age->12) 27

TEST RIG OF SAMPLE 2 Rule ID: r2 Expression: ?x,?y Atom: knows(?x,?y) Literal: knows(?x,?y) ( line 1:47 mismatched input ' ' expecting NEWLINE ?, ? ) Expression: ?x,?y. Atom: commonInterest(?x,?y) Literal: ~commonInterest(?x,?y) Condition Cluster: ~commonInterest(?x,?y) Body: ~commonInterest(?x,?y) 28

CONCLUSION  The idea of this project can be considered as a reasoning component for a PA in a virtual organization.  Defeasible reasoning extension of the sample helps PA to make difference between knowing and friendship concepts based on interest. Knowing concept might be considered as just a relation, but common interests, daily routines, gender and job prepare the ground for friendship.  Thanks to Harold Boley and RuleML colleagues for feedback on this project. 29

30 THANKS A LOT FOR YOUR ATTENTION