Talk:Commonsense knowledge (artificial intelligence)

message: I'd like to move this from commonsense knowledge bases to commonsense knowledge (artificial intelligence). Any objections? ---- CharlesGillingham (talk) 10:19, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: To me, that would make a lot of sense - then we could link this article to the German article/translation ":de:Weltwissen" (lit. "world knowledge") which right now cannot be linked because of the mismatched article suffix "knowledge base".--194.138.39.54 (talk) 14:46, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure this article even needs to exist. I've never heard the term "Commonsense knowledge base". In my experience people just talk about a knowledge base and the problem of representing common sense reasoning. I think folding this article into an article about common sense reasoning or some other article might make sense. But in lieu of that I agree with the proposal, that what the article is talking about is the general type of knowledge that an AI must have to represent knowledge, that is the thing worth talking about not some special KB that is constructed to represent that knowledge. RedDog (talk) 18:19, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Would you mind doing the merge? It's pretty easy.  I think we should merge to commonsense knowledge, which didn't exist five years ago when I suggested the move. (I've retired from Wikipedia, except to stop by and repair damage once a month or so.) It was easy, so I did it.  ---- CharlesGillingham (talk) 08:13, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move 

message: I think some of the knowledge bases listed there don't belong. An Upper Model is not the same thing as a Common Sense Knowledge Base. An Upper Model defines a particular metaphysical view that is meant to be standard across all ontologies. I think you could make a case that a Common Sense KB requires an Upper Model but they are not the same thing. I plan to remove BFO, that's one Upper Model I'm pretty familiar with and I don't think it's a common sense KB at all. I may also review some of the other links and remove them if they are not appropriate. Just wanted to explain this before I do it in case anyone disagrees. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 14:52, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Common Sense Knowledge Bases section: Upper Models are not Common Sense 

message: The article is entitled commonsense knowledge, not knowledge base.  So commonsense KNOWLEDGE (AI) is broad... that would include kb, reasoning, even knowledge representation, as well as the applications including not just natural language.. also, the idea of crowd sourced or big data common sense collectives is a fairly recent development, so only representing this aspect of common sense would be amiss.   The article as it stands seems only to represents the insular work of a very small group of people...   its a disservice to the public to make other aspects of commonsense knowledge (AI)  invisible.   Especially, now that we need Explainable AI.   Reason maintenance systems leave a bread crumb trail for common sense systems. Why leave that out, when its really important?   It is helpful to be in synch with the German view.
 Jefferson2011  —Preceding undated comment added 19:07, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Common Sense Knowledge (AI) : CSK INCLUDES REASONING, REPRESENTATION AND BASES/COLLECTIVES  

message: The recent edits by User:Jefferson2011 bring to a head that there's insufficient distinction between "Commonsense knowledge" and "Commonsense reasoning" in the literature to justify two separate articles. We need to either merge them together, or (my marginal preference) rename this article to "Commonsense knowledge base". Thoughts? Rolf H Nelson (talk) 06:52, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: This makes sense, because there is an overlap. "Commonsense knowledge and reasoning (artificial intelligence)", with appropriate redirects? ---- CharlesTGillingham (talk) 18:35, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article vs. [[Commonsense reasoning]] 

message: (These notes are mostly for myself)
I'm feeling that this article (and commonsense reasoning) need several opening sections that really describes the scope of the problem for the layman. The layman needs this detailed description to understand the rest of the material in context. 
This article should add: 
#A more robust and intuitive description of the problem for layman, including all those examples from Minsky and Lenat.
#A description of default reasoning for the layman, emphasizing the role of commonsense knowledge. 
#A description of the qualification problem, ramification problem and frame problem for the layman, and their relationship to commonsense knowledge.
#The psychological evidence (from Daniel Kahneman and others) of how commonsense knowledge is represented in the brain (i.e., "System 1")
#A description of the knowledge acquisition bottleneck, and what it meant to expert systems in the 1990s.   
#The way that large language models like GPT scrape the internet for knowledge (especially the curated knowledge of Wikipedia, Stack Exchange, etc.) and the long-term prospects of this technique, and current efforts to procure more reliable knowledge for these applications. (I have some sources for this, but more would be helpful.)
I'm hoping to have to time to work on this project this summer and fall. Any help (especially reliable sources) would be great. Also, if you think I've left something out of the list above, let me know. ---- CharlesTGillingham (talk) 18:55, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  For the layman