Today

• 11 hours ago

  Overview (A high-level overview of this NARS implementation) Wiki page edited by NARS.Wang   -   Revision r121 Edited wiki page through web user interface.

  Revision r121 Edited wiki page through web user interface.
• 12 hours ago

  GUIGuide Wiki page deleted by NARS.Wang   -   Revision r120 Deleting wiki page GUIGuide.

  Revision r120 Deleting wiki page GUIGuide.

Last 7 days

• Dec 21, 2009

  GUIGuide (User's Guide of the GUI of NARS.) Wiki page edited by NARS.Wang   -   Revision r119 Edited wiki page through web user interface.

  Revision r119 Edited wiki page through web user interface.
• Dec 21, 2009

  GUIGuide (User's Guide of the GUI of NARS.) Wiki page edited by NARS.Wang   -   Revision r118 Edited wiki page through web user interface.

  Revision r118 Edited wiki page through web user interface.
• Dec 21, 2009

  GUIGuide (User's Guide of the GUI of NARS.) Wiki page edited by NARS.Wang   -   Revision r117 Edited wiki page through web user interface.

  Revision r117 Edited wiki page through web user interface.

Earlier this year

• Oct 11, 2009

  issue 19 (Show "perfect" belief in addition to "present" belief) Status changed by NARS.Wang   -   Looks good.

  Status: Verified

  Looks good.

  Status: Verified
• Oct 11, 2009

  issue 19 (Show "perfect" belief in addition to "present" belief) reported by jefft0   -   In addition to the highest confidence "present" belief which can have mixed positive and negative evidence, it is also useful to know the "perfect" belief, which is the highest confidence belief that has only positive or negative evidence. nars.entity.Concept.tryUpdate has been changed to also keep perfectBelief, which is the present belief that has frequency 1.0 or 0.0. And displayContent has been changed to show this in the ConceptWindow. Please review.

  In addition to the highest confidence "present" belief which can have mixed positive and negative evidence, it is also useful to know the "perfect" belief, which is the highest confidence belief that has only positive or negative evidence. nars.entity.Concept.tryUpdate has been changed to also keep perfectBelief, which is the present belief that has frequency 1.0 or 0.0. And displayContent has been changed to show this in the ConceptWindow. Please review.
• Oct 11, 2009

  r116 (For the ConceptWindow, in addition to "present" belief, show...) committed by jefft0   -   For the ConceptWindow, in addition to "present" belief, show "perfect" belief which is the best belief with frequency 1.0 or 0.0.

  For the ConceptWindow, in addition to "present" belief, show "perfect" belief which is the best belief with frequency 1.0 or 0.0.
• Oct 11, 2009

  r115 (Decrease the contribution of analytical truths to empirical ...) committed by NARS.Wang   -   Decrease the contribution of analytical truths to empirical judgments [Issue 17]

  Decrease the contribution of analytical truths to empirical judgments [Issue 17]
• Sep 24, 2009

  issue 18 (Wrong ShortFloat value when NEAR_FUTURE = 2.) Status changed by NARS.Wang   -   Fixed the bug in the revision function which implicitly assumes NEAR_FUTURE == 1.

  Status: Fixed

  Fixed the bug in the revision function which implicitly assumes NEAR_FUTURE == 1.

  Status: Fixed
• Sep 24, 2009

  r114 (Fixed the bug in the revision function which implicitly assu...) committed by NARS.Wang   -   Fixed the bug in the revision function which implicitly assumes NEAR_FUTURE == 1. [ Issue 18 ]

  Fixed the bug in the revision function which implicitly assumes NEAR_FUTURE == 1. [ Issue 18 ]
• Sep 23, 2009

  issue 18 (Wrong ShortFloat value when NEAR_FUTURE = 2.) reported by jefft0   -   What steps will reproduce the problem? 1. In nars.main.Parameters, set NEAR_FUTURE = 2. 2. Launch NARS and enter the following input. (This issue happens with just about any input): <x --> y>. <x --> z>. 3. Click Run. 4. Watch the console output. What is the expected output? What do you see instead? Console should be silent, but produces many warnings like: !!! Wrong value: -0.024941444 These are from nars.entity.ShortFloat.setValue at line if ((v < 0) || (v > 1)) { System.out.println("!!! Wrong value: " + v); Usually it seems that nars.inference.BudgetFunctions.revise passes a negative "priority" to new BudgetValue.

  What steps will reproduce the problem? 1. In nars.main.Parameters, set NEAR_FUTURE = 2. 2. Launch NARS and enter the following input. (This issue happens with just about any input): <x --> y>. <x --> z>. 3. Click Run. 4. Watch the console output. What is the expected output? What do you see instead? Console should be silent, but produces many warnings like: !!! Wrong value: -0.024941444 These are from nars.entity.ShortFloat.setValue at line if ((v < 0) || (v > 1)) { System.out.println("!!! Wrong value: " + v); Usually it seems that nars.inference.BudgetFunctions.revise passes a negative "priority" to new BudgetValue.
• Sep 20, 2009

  issue 17 (Intruduction of terms in a compound statment may be arbitrar...) reported by jefft0   -   What steps will reproduce the problem? 1. In nars.main.Parameters, set MAXMUM_STAMP_LENGTH = 16; MAXMUM_BELIEF_LENGTH = 8; 2. Launch NARS and enter the following input: <{c1} --> canary> . <{c1} --> fly> . <{c2} --> canary> . <{c2} --> fly> . <{p1} --> penguin> . <{p1} --> nofly> . <{p2} --> penguin> . <{p2} --> nofly> . <<#1 --> nofly> ==> (--, <#1 --> fly>)> . %1; .9999% <<#1 --> fly> ==> (--, <#1 --> nofly>)> . %1; .9999% <<#1 --> nofly> ==> <#1 --> fly>> . %0; .9999% <<#1 --> fly> ==> <#1 --> nofly>> . %0; .9999% <canary --> fly> ? <penguin --> nofly> ? <canary --> nofly> ? <penguin --> fly> ? 3. Click Run. What is the expected output? What do you see instead? After at least 131800 cycles, the Concept Window for <canary --> nofly> includes the following derivation: <canary --> nofly>. %1.0000;0.4475% {128125: 8;7} <(|,canary,penguin) --> nofly>. %1.0000;0.4475% {82778: 8;7} <{p2} --> nofly>. %1.0000;0.9000% {0: 8} <{p2} --> (|,canary,penguin)>. %1.0000;0.9000% {2870: 7} <{p2} --> penguin>. %1.0000;0.9000% {0: 7} The conclusion <canary --> nofly> is based on evidence from statements 8;7. But the term "canary" is not related to these statements. The problem is that NARS can do a similar derivation starting from different evidence, such as 5;6, "arbitrarily" introducing the term "canary" again, and conclude <canary --> nofly> again, and do revision to combine them. In this way, NARS may be able to convince itself with high confidence of just about anything.

  What steps will reproduce the problem? 1. In nars.main.Parameters, set MAXMUM_STAMP_LENGTH = 16; MAXMUM_BELIEF_LENGTH = 8; 2. Launch NARS and enter the following input: <{c1} --> canary> . <{c1} --> fly> . <{c2} --> canary> . <{c2} --> fly> . <{p1} --> penguin> . <{p1} --> nofly> . <{p2} --> penguin> . <{p2} --> nofly> . <<#1 --> nofly> ==> (--, <#1 --> fly>)> . %1; .9999% <<#1 --> fly> ==> (--, <#1 --> nofly>)> . %1; .9999% <<#1 --> nofly> ==> <#1 --> fly>> . %0; .9999% <<#1 --> fly> ==> <#1 --> nofly>> . %0; .9999% <canary --> fly> ? <penguin --> nofly> ? <canary --> nofly> ? <penguin --> fly> ? 3. Click Run. What is the expected output? What do you see instead? After at least 131800 cycles, the Concept Window for <canary --> nofly> includes the following derivation: <canary --> nofly>. %1.0000;0.4475% {128125: 8;7} <(|,canary,penguin) --> nofly>. %1.0000;0.4475% {82778: 8;7} <{p2} --> nofly>. %1.0000;0.9000% {0: 8} <{p2} --> (|,canary,penguin)>. %1.0000;0.9000% {2870: 7} <{p2} --> penguin>. %1.0000;0.9000% {0: 7} The conclusion <canary --> nofly> is based on evidence from statements 8;7. But the term "canary" is not related to these statements. The problem is that NARS can do a similar derivation starting from different evidence, such as 5;6, "arbitrarily" introducing the term "canary" again, and conclude <canary --> nofly> again, and do revision to combine them. In this way, NARS may be able to convince itself with high confidence of just about anything.
• Sep 19, 2009

  r113 (Confidence discount added to inference.StructuralRules) committed by NARS.Wang   -   Confidence discount added to inference.StructuralRules

  Confidence discount added to inference.StructuralRules
• Sep 18, 2009

  r112 (New function: add a "correlation discount" to the confidence...) committed by NARS.Wang   -   New function: add a "correlation discount" to the confidence of the conclusions produced by the CompositionalRules

  New function: add a "correlation discount" to the confidence of the conclusions produced by the CompositionalRules
• Sep 18, 2009

  r111 (New function: directly express negative judgments as negatio...) committed by NARS.Wang   -   New function: directly express negative judgments as negations

  New function: directly express negative judgments as negations
• Sep 18, 2009

  r110 (Conclusions from single-premise rules get the correct creati...) committed by NARS.Wang   -   Conclusions from single-premise rules get the correct creationTime. [ Issue 15 ]

  Conclusions from single-premise rules get the correct creationTime. [ Issue 15 ]
• Sep 18, 2009

  issue 15 (Display the clock value of when a Judgment was created) Status changed by NARS.Wang   -   Now every conclusion from single-premise rules gets a new Stamp with a different creation time, though the same list of sequential numbers.

  Status: Fixed

  Now every conclusion from single-premise rules gets a new Stamp with a different creation time, though the same list of sequential numbers.

  Status: Fixed
• Sep 18, 2009

  issue 16 (Variable is only bound to one term) Status changed by NARS.Wang   -   SInce there is no "variable unbound" mechanism, unification should always work on cloned Sentences. To pass beliefTerm as argument only solves one occurence of the issue. Now in detachmentWithVar, the input mainSentence is cloned first.

  Status: Fixed

  SInce there is no "variable unbound" mechanism, unification should always work on cloned Sentences. To pass beliefTerm as argument only solves one occurence of the issue. Now in detachmentWithVar, the input mainSentence is cloned first.

  Status: Fixed
• Sep 18, 2009

  r109 (Variable.unify must always works on cloned task or belief. [...) committed by NARS.Wang   -   Variable.unify must always works on cloned task or belief. [ Issue 16 ]

  Variable.unify must always works on cloned task or belief. [ Issue 16 ]
• Sep 15, 2009

  issue 16 (Variable is only bound to one term) commented on by jefft0   -   Tracing the code: In the call to nars.inference.reason, bLink is "<<#1 --> a> ==> <#1 --> b>>", and beliefTerm is set to a clone of this "for substitution". The cloned beliefTerm is passed to syllogisms, but is only used to check the type. Then syllogisms passes the original Memory.currentBelief, not the cloned copy, to detachmentWithVar which calls Variable.unify to permanently mutate it. Should syllogisms also pass the cloned beliefTerm to detachmentWithVar to be used in unify instead of Memory.currentBelief?

  Tracing the code: In the call to nars.inference.reason, bLink is "<<#1 --> a> ==> <#1 --> b>>", and beliefTerm is set to a clone of this "for substitution". The cloned beliefTerm is passed to syllogisms, but is only used to check the type. Then syllogisms passes the original Memory.currentBelief, not the cloned copy, to detachmentWithVar which calls Variable.unify to permanently mutate it. Should syllogisms also pass the cloned beliefTerm to detachmentWithVar to be used in unify instead of Memory.currentBelief?
• Sep 14, 2009

  issue 16 (Variable is only bound to one term) Summary changed by jefft0   -  

  Summary: Variable is only bound to one term

  Summary: Variable is only bound to one term
• Sep 14, 2009

  issue 16 (Variable is only biund to one term) reported by jefft0   -   What steps will reproduce the problem? 1. Launch NARS and enter the following input: <<#1 --> a> ==> <#1 --> b>> . <x --> a> . <x --> b> ? <y --> a> . <y --> b> ? 2. Click Run. What is the expected output? What do you see instead? Expect NARS to separately bind the variable #1 to x and y to derive both answers, but NARS appears to only bind to x: <x --> b>. %1.0000;0.8100% <<x --> a> ==> <x --> b>>. %1.0000;0.9000% <x --> a>. %1.0000;0.9000% NARS does not do the equivalent for y. From looking at the code, it appears that NARS permanently mutates the Concept <<#1 --> a> ==> <#1 --> b>> to <<x --> a> ==> <x --> b>>. I don't see any code to "unbind" a variable after a sentence is used in a derivation, so that it could bind to another term like y. (Maybe this is why a lot of my experiments don't give the results I expect....)

  What steps will reproduce the problem? 1. Launch NARS and enter the following input: <<#1 --> a> ==> <#1 --> b>> . <x --> a> . <x --> b> ? <y --> a> . <y --> b> ? 2. Click Run. What is the expected output? What do you see instead? Expect NARS to separately bind the variable #1 to x and y to derive both answers, but NARS appears to only bind to x: <x --> b>. %1.0000;0.8100% <<x --> a> ==> <x --> b>>. %1.0000;0.9000% <x --> a>. %1.0000;0.9000% NARS does not do the equivalent for y. From looking at the code, it appears that NARS permanently mutates the Concept <<#1 --> a> ==> <#1 --> b>> to <<x --> a> ==> <x --> b>>. I don't see any code to "unbind" a variable after a sentence is used in a derivation, so that it could bind to another term like y. (Maybe this is why a lot of my experiments don't give the results I expect....)
• Sep 13, 2009

  issue 15 (Display the clock value of when a Judgment was created) reported by jefft0   -   What steps will reproduce the problem? 1. Launch NARS and enter the following input <x --> y>. <y --> x>? 2. Click menu View --> Inference Log 3. Click Walk a few times. What is the expected output? What do you see instead? The concept window shows: Present Belief: <y --> x>. %1.0000;0.4737% {0: 1} <x --> y>. %1.0000;0.9000% {0: 1} The Inference log shows that <y --> x>. %1.0000;0.4737% was derived at clock 2, but this is not shown in the concept window since the creation of the original Stamp is kept for single-premise inference like conversions, structural composition, etc. It is useful to know the clock value when the Judgment was created so it is possible to find it in the Inference Log to see the task links that were used, to re-trace in the debugger, etc. We can't let Sentence just update the creationTime of the Stamp that it stores, since this is used for temporal reasoning. An idea is for Sentence to display its own creation time in addition to the one in the Stamp, for example: <y --> x>. %1.0000;0.4737% {0: 1} @2 <x --> y>. %1.0000;0.9000% {0: 1} @0 Any thoughts?

  What steps will reproduce the problem? 1. Launch NARS and enter the following input <x --> y>. <y --> x>? 2. Click menu View --> Inference Log 3. Click Walk a few times. What is the expected output? What do you see instead? The concept window shows: Present Belief: <y --> x>. %1.0000;0.4737% {0: 1} <x --> y>. %1.0000;0.9000% {0: 1} The Inference log shows that <y --> x>. %1.0000;0.4737% was derived at clock 2, but this is not shown in the concept window since the creation of the original Stamp is kept for single-premise inference like conversions, structural composition, etc. It is useful to know the clock value when the Judgment was created so it is possible to find it in the Inference Log to see the task links that were used, to re-trace in the debugger, etc. We can't let Sentence just update the creationTime of the Stamp that it stores, since this is used for temporal reasoning. An idea is for Sentence to display its own creation time in addition to the one in the Stamp, for example: <y --> x>. %1.0000;0.4737% {0: 1} @2 <x --> y>. %1.0000;0.9000% {0: 1} @0 Any thoughts?
• Sep 13, 2009

  r108 (Fix bug: In convertedJudgment, the premise is Memory.current...) committed by jefft0   -   Fix bug: In convertedJudgment, the premise is Memory.currentBelief, not Memory.currentTask.

  Fix bug: In convertedJudgment, the premise is Memory.currentBelief, not Memory.currentTask.
• Sep 13, 2009

  r108 (Fix bug: In convertedJudgment, the premise is Memory.current...) committed by jefft0   -   Fix bug: In convertedJudgment, the premise is Memory.currentBelief, not Memory.currentTask.

  Fix bug: In convertedJudgment, the premise is Memory.currentBelief, not Memory.currentTask.
• Sep 13, 2009

  issue 14 (Inference from <{p1} --> penguin> to <(|,{p1},canary) --> (|...) Status changed by NARS.Wang   -   The derivation from <{p1} --> penguin> to <(|,{p1},canary) --> (|,canary,penguin)> follows from NAL-Spec Theorem 24. The conclusion <(&,{p1},canary) --> (|,canary,penguin)> is also valid, but weaker, since <(&,{p1},canary) --> (|,{p1},canary)>

  Status: WontFix

  The derivation from <{p1} --> penguin> to <(|,{p1},canary) --> (|,canary,penguin)> follows from NAL-Spec Theorem 24. The conclusion <(&,{p1},canary) --> (|,canary,penguin)> is also valid, but weaker, since <(&,{p1},canary) --> (|,{p1},canary)>

  Status: WontFix
• Sep 13, 2009

  issue 13 (Added display of the derivation in ConceptWindow) Status changed by NARS.Wang   -   New function confirmed.

  Status: Verified

  New function confirmed.

  Status: Verified
• Sep 13, 2009

  r107 (Add "instanceof" checking before casting. [Issue 12] ) committed by NARS.Wang   -   Add "instanceof" checking before casting. [ Issue 12 ]

  Add "instanceof" checking before casting. [ Issue 12 ]
• Sep 13, 2009

  r107 (Add "instanceof" checking before casting. [Issue 12] ) committed by NARS.Wang   -   Add "instanceof" checking before casting. [ Issue 12 ]

  Add "instanceof" checking before casting. [ Issue 12 ]
• Sep 13, 2009

  issue 12 (Exception: IntersectionInt cannot be cast to Statement) Status changed by NARS.Wang   -   The input is invalid, though in a form that beyond the recognition ability of the parser. If S is a statement, then <M --> S> doesn't make sense (a statement cannot be made more specific by inheritance). If S isn't a statement, then (&&, S, <M --> P>) doesn't make sense (a non-statement cannot be a component of Conjunction. To avoid the exception, type checking is added before the casting.

  Status: Fixed

  The input is invalid, though in a form that beyond the recognition ability of the parser. If S is a statement, then <M --> S> doesn't make sense (a statement cannot be made more specific by inheritance). If S isn't a statement, then (&&, S, <M --> P>) doesn't make sense (a non-statement cannot be a component of Conjunction. To avoid the exception, type checking is added before the casting.

  Status: Fixed
• Sep 13, 2009

  issue 14 (Inference from <{p1} --> penguin> to <(|,{p1},canary) --> (|...) commented on by jefft0   -   Sorry (it's late), the above step 1 should be: 1. Launch NARS and enter the following: <{b2} --> canary> . <{b2} --> fly> . <{p2} --> penguin> . <{p2} --> nofly> . <{b1} --> canary> . <{b1} --> fly> . <{p1} --> penguin> . <{p1} --> nofly> . <<#1 --> nofly> ==> (--, <#1 --> fly>)> . %1; .9999% <<#1 --> fly> ==> (--, <#1 --> nofly>)> . %1; .9999% <canary --> fly> ? <penguin --> nofly> ? <canary --> nofly> ? <penguin --> fly> ?

  Sorry (it's late), the above step 1 should be: 1. Launch NARS and enter the following: <{b2} --> canary> . <{b2} --> fly> . <{p2} --> penguin> . <{p2} --> nofly> . <{b1} --> canary> . <{b1} --> fly> . <{p1} --> penguin> . <{p1} --> nofly> . <<#1 --> nofly> ==> (--, <#1 --> fly>)> . %1; .9999% <<#1 --> fly> ==> (--, <#1 --> nofly>)> . %1; .9999% <canary --> fly> ? <penguin --> nofly> ? <canary --> nofly> ? <penguin --> fly> ?
• Sep 13, 2009

  issue 14 (Inference from <{p1} --> penguin> to <(|,{p1},canary) --> (|...) reported by jefft0   -   What steps will reproduce the problem? 1. Launch NARS and enter the following: 2. Click menu View > Inference Log. 3. In the Inference Log text box, enter the following and select Watch String: <(|,{p1},canary) --> (|,canary,penguin)> 4. Click Run and wait for the Inference Log to stop at clock 5289. What is the expected output? What do you see instead? The inference log shows: --- 5289 --- * Selected Concept: penguin * Selected TaskLink: $0.8060;0.8000;0.9487$ _@(T4-2) <{p1} --> penguin>. %1.0000;0.9000% {0: 7} * Selected TermLink: $0.8859;0.1909;0.3887$ _@(T2-2) (|,canary,penguin) !!! Derived: $0.2912;0.1662;0.3354$ <(|,{p1},canary) --> (|,canary,penguin)>. %1.0000;0.9000% {0: 7} Is this right? NARS infers from <{p1} --> penguin> "p1 is a penguin" to <(|,{p1},canary) --> (|,canary,penguin)> "something that is p1 and a canary is a canary or a penguin", with the same truth value. It seems that maybe the conclusion should be <(&,{p1},canary) --> (|,canary,penguin)>

  What steps will reproduce the problem? 1. Launch NARS and enter the following: 2. Click menu View > Inference Log. 3. In the Inference Log text box, enter the following and select Watch String: <(|,{p1},canary) --> (|,canary,penguin)> 4. Click Run and wait for the Inference Log to stop at clock 5289. What is the expected output? What do you see instead? The inference log shows: --- 5289 --- * Selected Concept: penguin * Selected TaskLink: $0.8060;0.8000;0.9487$ _@(T4-2) <{p1} --> penguin>. %1.0000;0.9000% {0: 7} * Selected TermLink: $0.8859;0.1909;0.3887$ _@(T2-2) (|,canary,penguin) !!! Derived: $0.2912;0.1662;0.3354$ <(|,{p1},canary) --> (|,canary,penguin)>. %1.0000;0.9000% {0: 7} Is this right? NARS infers from <{p1} --> penguin> "p1 is a penguin" to <(|,{p1},canary) --> (|,canary,penguin)> "something that is p1 and a canary is a canary or a penguin", with the same truth value. It seems that maybe the conclusion should be <(&,{p1},canary) --> (|,canary,penguin)>
• Sep 13, 2009

  issue 13 (Added display of the derivation in ConceptWindow) reported by jefft0   -   Change Judgment to take (possibly null) premises in order to display the derivation. In ConceptWindow, added "Derivation" Checkbox, which is checked by default. Can be unchecked if the derivation becomes too long. Code changes already committed. Please review.

  Change Judgment to take (possibly null) premises in order to display the derivation. In ConceptWindow, added "Derivation" Checkbox, which is checked by default. Can be unchecked if the derivation becomes too long. Code changes already committed. Please review.
• Sep 13, 2009

  r106 (Change Judgment to take (possibly null) premises in order to...) committed by jefft0   -   Change Judgment to take (possibly null) premises in order to display the derivation. In ConceptWindow, added "Derivation" Checkbox.

  Change Judgment to take (possibly null) premises in order to display the derivation. In ConceptWindow, added "Derivation" Checkbox.
• Sep 13, 2009

  issue 12 (Exception: IntersectionInt cannot be cast to Statement) reported by jefft0   -   What steps will reproduce the problem? 1. Launch NARS and enter the following input: <M --> S>. <M --> P>. (&&, S, <M --> P>). 2. Click Run. What is the expected output? What do you see instead? Expect NARS to run, but it throws "ClassCastException: nars.language.IntersectionInt cannot be cast to nars.language.Statement" in nars.inference.structuralStatement at line Term content = Statement.make((Statement) task.getContent(), subject, predicate); The values are: task.getContent(): IntersectionInt "(|,P,S)" subject: IntersectionInt "(|,P,S)" predicate: Term "S" structuralStatement is called from structuralCompose1. Please use labels and text to provide additional information.

  What steps will reproduce the problem? 1. Launch NARS and enter the following input: <M --> S>. <M --> P>. (&&, S, <M --> P>). 2. Click Run. What is the expected output? What do you see instead? Expect NARS to run, but it throws "ClassCastException: nars.language.IntersectionInt cannot be cast to nars.language.Statement" in nars.inference.structuralStatement at line Term content = Statement.make((Statement) task.getContent(), subject, predicate); The values are: task.getContent(): IntersectionInt "(|,P,S)" subject: IntersectionInt "(|,P,S)" predicate: Term "S" structuralStatement is called from structuralCompose1. Please use labels and text to provide additional information.
• Sep 12, 2009

  r105 (Confidence 1.0000 will be automatically changed into 0.9999) committed by NARS.Wang   -   Confidence 1.0000 will be automatically changed into 0.9999

  Confidence 1.0000 will be automatically changed into 0.9999
• Sep 11, 2009

  r104 (Change parameters to speed up testing) committed by NARS.Wang   -   Change parameters to speed up testing

  Change parameters to speed up testing
• Sep 11, 2009

  r103 (Add function to InferenceWindow: the display stops at the ne...) committed by NARS.Wang   -   Add function to InferenceWindow: the display stops at the next occurrence of a given String or Term (parsed)

  Add function to InferenceWindow: the display stops at the next occurrence of a given String or Term (parsed)
• Sep 11, 2009

  r102 (Pass the "structural" flag to revision conclusions [Issue 11...) committed by NARS.Wang   -   Pass the "structural" flag to revision conclusions [ Issue 11 ], plus fix a typo

  Pass the "structural" flag to revision conclusions [ Issue 11 ], plus fix a typo
• Sep 11, 2009

  issue 11 (NARS infers from <{b1} --> fly> to <(|,{b1},bird) --> fly>) changed by NARS.Wang   -   This step itself is correct. From "<{b1} --> fly>." (given) and "<T1 --> (|,T1,T2) >." (Theorem 21, NAL Spec) by induction the system can get "<(|,{b1},bird) --> fly>." The problem in your email was probably cause by the fact that when two such conclusions are merged by the revision rule, the "stractural" flag was not passed to the conclusion, which has been fixed.

  Status: Fixed

  Cc: −NARS.Wang

  This step itself is correct. From "<{b1} --> fly>." (given) and "<T1 --> (|,T1,T2) >." (Theorem 21, NAL Spec) by induction the system can get "<(|,{b1},bird) --> fly>." The problem in your email was probably cause by the fact that when two such conclusions are merged by the revision rule, the "stractural" flag was not passed to the conclusion, which has been fixed.

  Status: Fixed

  Cc: −NARS.Wang
• Sep 11, 2009

  r101 (Add null truth-value checking in decomposeCompound [Issue 8]...) committed by NARS.Wang   -   Add null truth-value checking in decomposeCompound [ Issue 8 ]

  Add null truth-value checking in decomposeCompound [ Issue 8 ]
• Sep 11, 2009

  issue 8 (Again: null truth in CompositionRules.decomposeCompound) Status changed by NARS.Wang   -   The checking (truth != null) turns out to be necessary, since certain premise combinations are not processed by this rule. For example, in the reported case, the premises are "<{b5} --> bird>." and "<(-,{b5},fly) --> bird>." and from them "<fly -- > bird>." cannot be derived, no matter what truth-values are involved.

  Status: Fixed

  The checking (truth != null) turns out to be necessary, since certain premise combinations are not processed by this rule. For example, in the reported case, the premises are "<{b5} --> bird>." and "<(-,{b5},fly) --> bird>." and from them "<fly -- > bird>." cannot be derived, no matter what truth-values are involved.

  Status: Fixed
• Sep 11, 2009

  r100 (Added a type checking condition for the casting in RuleTable...) committed by NARS.Wang   -   Added a type checking condition for the casting in RuleTables.detachmentWithVar [ Issue 10 ]

  Added a type checking condition for the casting in RuleTables.detachmentWithVar [ Issue 10 ]
• Sep 11, 2009

  issue 10 (Exception: Negation cannot be cast to Statement) Status changed by NARS.Wang   -   Added type checking (statement.getPredicate() instanceof Statement) before the casting.

  Status: Fixed

  Added type checking (statement.getPredicate() instanceof Statement) before the casting.

  Status: Fixed
• Sep 11, 2009

  issue 9 (Term Window requires exact syntax.) Status changed by NARS.Wang   -   Changes confirmed

  Status: Verified

  Changes confirmed

  Status: Verified
• Sep 11, 2009

  issue 11 (NARS infers from <{b1} --> fly> to <(|,{b1},bird) --> fly>) reported by jefft0   -   What steps will reproduce the problem? 1. Launch NARS and click menu View > Inference Log 2. Enter the following input and click Run: <{b1} --> bird> . <{b1} --> fly> . <{b2} --> bird> . <{b2} --> fly> . <bird --> fly> ? 3. After the inference log displays clock cycle 2436, click Stop. What is the expected output? What do you see instead? The inference log displays: --- 2436 --- * Selected Concept: b1 * Selected TaskLink: $0.5950;0.8000;0.9487$ _@(T4-1-1) <{b1} --> fly>. %1.0000;0.9000% {0: 2} * Selected TermLink: $0.3333;0.1943;0.3354$ _@(T2-1-1) (|,{b1},bird) !!! Derived: $0.1304;0.1397;0.2810$ <(|,{b1},bird) --> fly>. %1.0000;0.4737% {0: 2} This is derived in nars.inference.StructuralRules.structuralCompose1 at the line structuralStatement(compound, pred, TruthFunctions.implied(truth)); where compound: IntersectionInt "(|,{b1},bird)" pred: Term "fly" truth: "%1.0000;0.9000%" TruthFunctions.implied(truth)): "%1.0000;0.4737%" Is this derivation correct? In your email, you said it may not be http://groups.google.com/group/open-nars/msg/66680643db403b61

  What steps will reproduce the problem? 1. Launch NARS and click menu View > Inference Log 2. Enter the following input and click Run: <{b1} --> bird> . <{b1} --> fly> . <{b2} --> bird> . <{b2} --> fly> . <bird --> fly> ? 3. After the inference log displays clock cycle 2436, click Stop. What is the expected output? What do you see instead? The inference log displays: --- 2436 --- * Selected Concept: b1 * Selected TaskLink: $0.5950;0.8000;0.9487$ _@(T4-1-1) <{b1} --> fly>. %1.0000;0.9000% {0: 2} * Selected TermLink: $0.3333;0.1943;0.3354$ _@(T2-1-1) (|,{b1},bird) !!! Derived: $0.1304;0.1397;0.2810$ <(|,{b1},bird) --> fly>. %1.0000;0.4737% {0: 2} This is derived in nars.inference.StructuralRules.structuralCompose1 at the line structuralStatement(compound, pred, TruthFunctions.implied(truth)); where compound: IntersectionInt "(|,{b1},bird)" pred: Term "fly" truth: "%1.0000;0.9000%" TruthFunctions.implied(truth)): "%1.0000;0.4737%" Is this derivation correct? In your email, you said it may not be http://groups.google.com/group/open-nars/msg/66680643db403b61
• Sep 10, 2009

  issue 10 (Exception: Negation cannot be cast to Statement) reported by jefft0   -   What steps will reproduce the problem? 1. Enter the following input and click Run: <canary --> bird> . <penguin --> bird> . <<#1 --> canary> ==> (--, <#1 --> penguin>)> . <canary --> fly> ? <penguin --> fly> ? What is the expected output? What do you see instead? NARS should keep running, but instead throws the exception ClassCastException: nars.language.Negation cannot be cast to nars.language.Statement in nars.inference.RuleTables.detachmentWithVar at the line Statement s2 = (Statement) statement.getPredicate(); with the following values statement: Implication "<<#1 --> canary> ==> (--,<#1 --> penguin>)>" statement.getPredicate(): Negation "(--,<#1 --> penguin>)"

  What steps will reproduce the problem? 1. Enter the following input and click Run: <canary --> bird> . <penguin --> bird> . <<#1 --> canary> ==> (--, <#1 --> penguin>)> . <canary --> fly> ? <penguin --> fly> ? What is the expected output? What do you see instead? NARS should keep running, but instead throws the exception ClassCastException: nars.language.Negation cannot be cast to nars.language.Statement in nars.inference.RuleTables.detachmentWithVar at the line Statement s2 = (Statement) statement.getPredicate(); with the following values statement: Implication "<<#1 --> canary> ==> (--,<#1 --> penguin>)>" statement.getPredicate(): Negation "(--,<#1 --> penguin>)"
• Sep 07, 2009

  issue 9 (Term Window requires exact syntax.) reported by jefft0   -   What steps will reproduce the problem? 1. Launch NARS and enter <a --> b>. 2. Click Run 3. Click menu View > Concept Content 4. Enter the following and click Show. (Notice the extra spaces.) < a --> b > What is the expected output? What do you see instead? NARS should show <a --> b>, but it ignores the input with extra spaces because NARS will only match the exact string. (This is also troublesome for other cases like (&,a,b) vs. (&, a, b) which caused me frustration.) Solution: TermWindow should use StringParser.parseTerm. This requires StringParser.parseTerm and StringParser.InvalidInputException to be public. (Is it a problem if these are public, or is this not the right way to use parserTerm?) The code changes are already committed to SVN. I will gladly revert if this is not a good idea.

  What steps will reproduce the problem? 1. Launch NARS and enter <a --> b>. 2. Click Run 3. Click menu View > Concept Content 4. Enter the following and click Show. (Notice the extra spaces.) < a --> b > What is the expected output? What do you see instead? NARS should show <a --> b>, but it ignores the input with extra spaces because NARS will only match the exact string. (This is also troublesome for other cases like (&,a,b) vs. (&, a, b) which caused me frustration.) Solution: TermWindow should use StringParser.parseTerm. This requires StringParser.parseTerm and StringParser.InvalidInputException to be public. (Is it a problem if these are public, or is this not the right way to use parserTerm?) The code changes are already committed to SVN. I will gladly revert if this is not a good idea.
• Sep 07, 2009

  r99 (When the Show button is clicked, use StringParser.parseTerm ...) committed by jefft0   -   When the Show button is clicked, use StringParser.parseTerm so the user doesn't have to type the exact internal syntax.

  When the Show button is clicked, use StringParser.parseTerm so the user doesn't have to type the exact internal syntax.