Re: Program# release 2.1

Here is the email thread about this being more efficient.  I have swapped mine to be reverse and have had a reduction in memory usage as well as startup time.

IMHO, the next revision of the standard should have them reversed.

******

>From Dr Wallace:

Helio, I think there is no good reason except that's how the architecture

commmittee decided the standard, based on the existing early AIML

interpreters.  We've kept it that way for compatibility.  One idea that's

been discussed over the years is to generalize the <pattern,that,topic>

triple to a botmaster-defined infinite number of pattern-contexts, which

could include concepts such as bot name, mood, state, personality and so

on.  There is in principle no reason the botmaster should not be allowed

to redefine the order as well as the number of levels of matching.



Note that it isn't necessarily true that the graph has to take up a lot of

memory when the "topic" and "that" are both "*", because one could

compress these paths with a special terminal node.



> The AIML standard states [1] that "an AIML interpreter

> must construct a match path from each category at

> load-time", and that "a match path has three

> components, whose order is mandatory": (pattern),

> (that) and (topic).

>

> My question is, what is the rationale behind this

> ordering? To me it looks the inverse would be a more

> efficient option. So long most categories have unset

> (topic) and (that) sections (something that is

> probably true for most AIML sets), a match path of the

> form:

>

> TOPIC ELEMENTS (TOPIC) THAT ELEMENTS (THAT) PATTERN

> ELEMENTS

>

> Would allow for more compact match graphs, since all

> topic-less, that-less categories would be placed under

> the same root node. Of course, this arrangement would

> cause the repetition of equivalent pattern elements

> from categories under different (topic) and/or (that)

> sections; but so long the number of unique (topic,

> that) pairs remained slow, this would be more than

> compensated by the savings.

>

> Am I missing something here?

>

> [1]

> http://www.alicebot.org/TR/2005/WD-aiml/#section-load-time-match-path-construction

>

> --

> Ja mata ne.

> Helio Perroni Filho

 

----- Original Message ----
From: Dr. Rich Wallace <drwallace@...>
To: Alicebot Developer Discussion <alicebot-developer@...>
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2006 8:54:58 AM
Subject: Re: [alicebot-developer] Program# release 2.1


> 4. Made changes to the way the path for queries to the Graphmaster are
> dealt with. It is now "backwards": (topic <topic> that <that> User input).

Why backwards?

_______________________________________________
alicebot-developer mailing list
alicebot-developer@...
http://list.alicebot.org/mailman/listinfo/alicebot-developer





 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Have a burning question?  
Go to www.Answers.yahoo.com and get answers from real people who know.
_______________________________________________
alicebot-developer mailing list
alicebot-developer@...
http://list.alicebot.org/mailman/listinfo/alicebot-developer