There is a lot to be said about probabilistic networks. They can be used to model many things from languages to social networks. And there are many kinds of probabilistic networks and they are a topic of active publishing at the moment.
Recently I tried a simple example based on a neat code called dyna. This pdf shows the use of a probabilistic network to “reason” or parse a number of input sentences. A set of probabilities that describe the probabilities of word transitions is supplied, and the system “miraculously” interprets the natural language grammar.
Then there is the question of whether I violated the license. The technique itself can get you into trouble using the same “flawed” reasoning that it performs itself (how ironic). Consider the following.
- Sarcastic. Regarding dyna: I only ran one example, the one I sent you. One might reason it most likely that I violated a license but I have not. If I do anything commercial I will write my own codes. It can be dangerous even to download a code since circumstantially they can infer guilt. You can be punished for likely guilt even though you are innocent. It is getting to be that guilt or innocence is not the question but instead what the likelihoods are. This would be a misuse of probabilistic reasoning. Anyway this is what the future holds. The reasoning probably needs to be altered to find the most likely medical explanation. Anyway this is sarcastic but the future is clear and already determined, so we are still not free.
- I do not violate software licenses. If I said this two more times I’d be guilty though, probably.
- That’s the thing about free software: it’s fascist.
- Guilt or innocence is determined by how much money you give lawyers, not by whether you are actually innocent or guilty.
I am a little surprised that my technical posts are getting some attention: at least from the WordPress community. There is interest in things technical. There is so much CS on the internet, actually. I wrote a short piece on blogging with WordPress and a few people made some superlative comments, which actually surprised me. A little social support really goes a long ways.
My friend Mike Iltis called me last night and we talked for around 3 hours on things technical. (I have the bottom of the line cell phone plan). Mike, who often teaches at the university, had sent me a new set of academic links on some interesting topics, and I share a few of them below. I am not an academic but am more half way in between academia and industry. Industry people regard me as an academic and academics see me as a commercial developer. (I was a commercial developer in Silicon Valley several years ago.) Anyway I do have academic interests, but I realize that there is very much that I do not know or understand. I am mentioning Mike Iltis as a reference for the links below.
- Self similar languages.
- There is one object oriented program and it is this. Every program is one object which is a recursive collection of objects, which in turn are collections of objects. Every object program is isomorphic to this program, and obviously this program is self similar to all of its parts. Mathematically and in terms of formal logic, these notions are more complex than they naively seem to appear.
- There are some really nice CS spots on the web.
- Here is some info on an interesting programming language called pliant. [2].
- Set theory: Setl programming language. [2].
- Colorless green ideas sleep furiously.
- Natural language interpretation (automated understanding) is a good topic. With all of the writing occurring especially since the advent of the blog, only computers will be able to read it all.
An exposition of writing, sensory exposure, plus more
