Professor B: Well that 's fine . Well anyway , go ahead .
Grad E: OK , and so this , oh that
Grad D: The other thing is that um every time that 's updated beliefs will have to be propagated but then the question is do you do we wanna propagate beliefs every single time it 's updated or only when we need to ?
Professor B: Yeah , that 's a good question . And uh does it have a lazy mode ? I don't remember .
Grad D: Uh Well , I mean , in Srini 's thing there was this thing there was this um option like proper inferences which suggests that uh doesn't happen , automatically .
Professor B: Oh right . Yeah . S probably does . Yeah someone has to track that down , but I but uh And and and I think actually uh
Grad E: I just accidentally Oops .
Professor B: one of the we w items for the uh user home base uh should be uh essentially non - local . I they 're only there for the day and they don't have a place that they 're staying .
Grad D: Well
Grad E: Oh just uh accidentally erased this , I I just had values here such as uh um is he s we had in our list we had " Is he staying in our hotel ? " , " Is he staying with friends ? " , and so forth
Professor B: Yeah .
Grad E: uh so we 're OK .
Professor B: So it 's clear where w w w where we are right now . So my suggestion is we just pick uh
Grad E: Something down here ?
Professor B: one , you know one uh particular one of the uh well let 's do the first first one let 's do the one that we sort of already think we did so w that was the of the endpoint ?
Grad E: Mm - hmm . And um Oops .
Grad D: Is hmm
Grad E: Ah ,
Grad D: So it 's true or false ?
Professor B: No , that 's that 's a
Grad E: OK . No no no , EVA .
Grad D: So
Grad E: Missed that one .
Grad C: What 's the difference between mode and endpoint ?
Grad D: I thought mode , yeah .
Professor B: although that
Grad E: Um mode was um
Professor B: Well , that 's
Grad D: Mode of transportation ?
Grad E: Yeah .
Grad D: OK . Also true or false .
Grad E: Mm - hmm .
Professor B: No , he has he hasn't filled them in yet , is what 's true .
Grad D: Yeah , OK .
Grad E: Did I or didn't I ?  Ah . Probably nothing done yet , oh I just did it on the upper ones , OK . Makes sense . OK , so this was EVA . Maybe we can think of more things , cross
Grad D: Yeah .
Grad A: Climb , rob .
Professor B: OK .
Grad E: climb , emerge
Professor B: No no no , these are ju that 's just a point ,
Grad C: Uh
Grad D: Well some of those are subsumed by approach .
Professor B: this is ju
Grad C: Would it be an endpoint if you were crossing over it ?
Grad A: The Charles Bridge , you know .
Professor B: Yeah , would be a f for a given segment . You know , you y you go first go the town square
Grad C: Well I eh
Grad A: No , I mean , if you go to re you know if you go to Prague or whatever one of your your key points that you have to do is cross the Charles Bridge and doesn't really matter which way you cross which where you end up at the end but the part the good part is walking over it , so .
Professor B: That 's subtle , but true . Anyway so let 's just leave it three with three for now
Grad E: Mm - hmm , mmm . Yeah .
Professor B: and let 's see if we can get it linked up just to get ourselves started .
Grad E: OK , we
Professor B: You 'll see it you 'll see something comes up immediately , that the reason I wanna do this .
Grad E: w well the uh user was uh definitely more likely to enter if he 's a local
Professor B: Right . Right .
Grad E: more likely to view if he 's a tourist um and then of course we had the fact that given the fact that he 's thrifty and there will be admission then we get all these cross um
Professor B: We did , but the three things w that that it contributed to this in fact , the other two aren't up there . so one was the ontology
Grad E: We 'll d what type of building is it ?
Professor B: Yeah .
Grad E: Yeah .
Professor B: And the and the third thing we talked about was something from the discourse .
Grad E: What he has mentioned before .
Professor B: OK , so this is w Right , so what w I what we seem to need here , this is why it starts getting into the technical stuff
Grad A: mm - hmm
Professor B: the way we had been designing this , there were three intermediate nodes uh which were the endpoint decision as seen from the uh user model as seen from the ontology and as seen from the discourse . So each of those the way we had it designed , now we can change the design , but the design we had was there was a decision with the same three outcomes uh based on the th those three separate considerations
Grad A: mm - hmm
Professor B: so if we wanted to do that would have to put in uh three intermediate nodes
Grad E: Uh we can load it up it you know very simple .
Grad A: So
Professor B: and then what you and I have to talk about is , OK if we 're doing that and they get combined somehow uh how do they get combined ? But the they 're they 're undoubtedly gonna be more things to worry about .
Grad E: So this was adjusted for this one mode thing .
Grad D: Oh yes .
Professor B: Yeah .
Grad E: So that 's w w in our uh in in Johno 's sort of pictogram everything that could contribute to whether a person wants to enter , view , or approach something .
Professor B: Oh , it was called mode , so this this is m mode here means the same as endpoint .
Grad E: Is now this endpoint .
Grad C: Right .
Professor B: OK , why don't we ch can we change that ?
Grad E: We can just rename that , yeah .
Professor B: Alright . You know , but that was actually , yeah unfortunately that was a um kind of an intermediate versio that 's I don't think what we would currently do .
Grad A: Can I ask about " slurred " and " angry " as inputs to this ?
Professor B: That 's a
Grad A: What why ?
Grad D: Like they 're either true or false
Grad E: The prosody ?
Grad A: OK .
Grad D: and they uh oh I see .
Grad C: If the if the person talking is angry or slurs their speech they might be tired or , you know
Grad A: Mm - hmm . OK . Drunk .
Grad D: Therefore
Grad C: And , you know , possibly uh
Grad A: Less likely to enter .
Grad C: some ,
Grad A: Hmm .
Grad C: yeah .
Grad D: uh I was thinking less likely to view
Professor B: Yeah . But that 's - that seems to , yeah . So so my advice to do is is get this down to what we think is actually likely to to be a a strong influence .
Grad A: OK .
Professor B: But yeah , that was what he had in mind .
Grad D: Right .
Professor B: So let 's think about this this question of how do we wanna handle so there 're two separate things . One is uh at least two . One is how do we want to handle the notion of the ontology now what we talked about , and this is another technical thing Bhaskara , is uh can we arrange so that I think we can so that the belief - net itself has properties and the properties are filled in uh from on ontology items . So the let 's take the case of the uh this endpoint thing , the notion was that if you had a few key properties like is this a tourist site , you know some kind of landmark is it a place of business uh is it something you physically could enter
Grad A: Mm - hmm .
Professor B: OK , et cetera . So that there 'd be certain properties that would fit into the decision node and then again as part of the ou outer controlling conditioning of this thing those would be set , so that some somehow someone would find this word , look it up in the ontology , pull out these properties , put it into the belief - net , and then the decision would flow .
Grad A: Mm - hmm .
Professor B: Now
Grad E: Seems to me that we 've sort of e em embedded a lot , em embedded a lot of these uh things we had in there previously in in in some of the other final decisions done here , for example if we would know that this thing is exhibiting something um
Professor B: Right . Right .
Grad E: if it 's exhibiting itself it is a landmark ,
Professor B: Yeah .
Grad E: meaning more likely to be viewed
Professor B: Yep .
Grad E: if it is exhibiting pictures or sculptures and stuff like this , then it 's more likely to be entered .
Professor B: I uh that 's I think that 's completely right and um I think that 's good , right ? So what what that says is that we might be able to uh take and in particular so so the ones we talked about were uh exhibiting and selling
Grad E: Accessibility .
Professor B: no , accessibility meant
Grad E: If it 's closed one probably won't enter . Or if it 's not accessible to a tourist ever the likelihood of that person actually wanting to enter it ,
Professor B: OK .
Grad E: given that he knows it , of course .
Professor B: Alright . So let me suggest this . Uh w could you move those up about halfway . Uh The ones that you th And selling I guess .
Grad E: Yeah , all all of these if it 's fixing things selling things , or servicing things
Professor B: Right . So here here 's what it looks like to me . is that you want an intermediate structure which i uh is essentially the or of uh for this purpose of of uh selling , f fixing , or servicing . So that it uh that is , for certain purposes , it becomes important but for this kind of purpose uh one of these places is quite like the other . Does that seem right ? So we di
Grad C: Basic you 're basically just merging those for just the sake of endpoint decision ?
Professor B: if we Yes .
Grad C: Yeah .
Grad A: Mm - hmm .
Professor B: So if well it may be more than endpoint decisions , so the idea would be that you might wanna merge those three
Grad E: These three ?
Professor B: Yeah . Eh ser s uh selling , fixing , and servicing .
Grad E: Yeah .
Grad D: What ex um and so either those is true f or false ?
Professor B: Uh Uh well it it i here 's where it gets a little tricky .
Grad D: So
Professor B: Uh from the belief - net point of view it is from another point of view of course it 's interest it 's it 's important to know what it 's selling or servicing and so forth .
Grad A: Yeah .
Professor B: So for this decision it 's just uh true or false
Grad D: OK . Yeah .
Professor B: and in th this is a case where the or seems just what you want .
Grad D: OK .
Professor B: That that if any of those things is true then it 's the kind of place that you uh
Grad E: Um more likely to enter .
Professor B: are more likely to enter .
Grad D: So you just wanna have them all pointing to a summary thing ?
Professor B: You could , yeah . Yeah , so let 's do that . No no , no eh to to an inter no , an intermediate node .
Grad D: T
Grad E: Oh , OK .
Professor B: That 's the p part of the idea , is
Grad E: Um is is that the object type node ?
Professor B: I d
Grad E: So are they the is it the kind of object that sells , fixes , or services things ?
Professor B: Well , o open up object type and let 's see what its values are .
Grad E: Oh I just created it , it has none so far .
Professor B: Oh , well OK first of all it 's not objects , we called them entities , right ?
Grad E: Yeah . And then we have sort of the um
Professor B: Let 's say I put commercial .
Grad E: Yeah , I w I was just gonna commercial action inside where people p
Professor B: Well couldn't I do let 's do commercial uh landmark and
Grad E: And where was the accessible , yeah .
Professor B: Well accessible I think is different cuz that 's tempor that that varies temporally ,
Grad E: Yeah .
Professor B: whereas this is a
Grad E: Mm - hmm .
Grad C: What would a hotel fall under ?
Professor B: I would call that a service , but but I don't know .
Grad C: Well I mean in terms of entity type ?
Professor B: Say w w well it 's co I would s a a again for this purpose I think it 's commercial . Someplace you want to go in to do some kind of business .
Grad C: OK .
Grad D: Um what does the underscore - T at the end of each of those things signify ?
Grad E: Um things . So places that service things sell things or fix things and pe places that e exhibit things .
Grad D: Uh - huh . OK . OK . That also points to entity type I guess .
Grad A: So we 're deriving um this the this feature of whether the the main action at this place happens inside or outside or what we 're deriving that from what kind of activity is done there ? Couldn't you have it as just a primitive feature of the entity ?
Professor B: Well you could , that 's a that 's a choice .
Grad A: OK .
Professor B: So uh
Grad A: I mean it seems like that 's much more reliable cuz you could have outdoor places that sell things and you know indoor places that do something else
Professor B: Yeah , the problem with it is that it sort of putting in a feature just for one decision ,
Grad A: and Hmm .
Professor B: now w we may wind up having to do that this i anyway , this i
Grad A: OK .
Professor B: at a mental level that 's what we we 're gonna have to sort out .
Grad A: OK .
Professor B: So , you know what does this look like , what are what are uh intermediate things that are worth computing , what are the features we need in order to make all these decisions
Grad A: Mm - hmm .
Professor B: and what 's the best way to organize this so that um it 's clean and and consistent and all that sort of stuff .
Grad A: OK . I 'm just thinking about how people , human beings who know about places and places to go and so on would store this and it would probably you wouldn't just sort of remember that they sell stuff and then deduce from that that it must be going on inside or something .
Grad E: Well I think an entity maybe should be regard as a vector of several possible things , it can either em do s do sell things , fix things , service things , exhibit things , it can be a landmark at the same time as doing these things ,
Grad A: Mm - hmm .
Grad E: it 's not either or mmm certainly a place can be a hotel and a famous site .
Grad A: Mm - hmm .
Grad E: Many come to mind . Things can be generally um a landmark and be accessible . IE a a castle or can be a landmark a or not accessible , some statue
Grad A: Mm - hmm .
Grad E: you know can go inside .