Dimensions of commonsense knowledge

Commonsense Knowledge Representation I

Significant advances in artificial intelligence, including machines that play master level chess, or make medical diagnoses, highlight an intriguing paradox. While systems can compete with highly qualified experts in many fields, there has been much less progress in constructing machines that exhibit simple commonsense, the kind expected of any normally intelligent child. As a result, commonsen...

Quantificational Sharpening of Commonsense Knowledge

The KNEXT system produces a large volume of factoids from text, expressing possibilistic general claims such as that ‘A PERSON MAY HAVE A HEAD’ or ‘PEOPLE MAY SAY SOMETHING’. We present a rule-based method to sharpen certain classes of factoids into stronger, quantified claims such as ‘ALL OR MOST PERSONS HAVE A HEAD’ or ‘ALL OR MOST PERSONS AT LEAST OCCASIONALLY SAY SOMETHING’ – statements str...

Commonsense Knowledge Representation II

Early attempts to implement systems that understand commonsense knowledge did so for very restricted domains. For example, the Planes system [Waltz, 1978] knew real world facts about a fleet of airplanes and could answer questions about them put to it in English. It had, however, no behaviors, could not interpret the facts, draw inferences from them or solve problems, other than those that have...

Commonsense Knowledge Base Completion

We enrich a curated resource of commonsense knowledge by formulating the problem as one of knowledge base completion (KBC). Most work in KBC focuses on knowledge bases like Freebase that relate entities drawn from a fixed set. However, the tuples in ConceptNet (Speer and Havasi, 2012) define relations between an unbounded set of phrases. We develop neural network models for scoring tuples on ar...

On Representing Commonsense Knowledge