Empirically Updated Prof. Yucong Duan's DIKWP Semantic Mathematics

Yucong Duan

International Standardization Committee of Networked DIKWP for Artificial Intelligence Evaluation(DIKWP-SC)

World Artificial Consciousness CIC(WAC)

World Conference on Artificial Consciousness(WCAC)

(Email: duanyucong@hotmail.com)

In The Paradox of Mathematics in AI Semantics. Proposed by Prof. Yucong Duan:" As Prof. Yucong Duan proposed the Paradox of Mathematics as that current mathematics will not reach the goal of supporting real AI development since it goes with the routine of based on abstraction of real semantics but want to reach the reality of semantics. ".  Actually Prof. Yucong Duan intented that the DIKWP Semantic Mathematics is constructed in an evolutionary manner as if an infant starts to understand the world while building its semantics space and conceptual space to accomplish its cognitive space development. In this way, every concepts which exists in the infant's mind is bundled formally with semantics evolved from the three basic semantics of DIKWP. There will not be misunderstandings on any concepts  if two infants who share the same cognitive development communicate with each other. All in all, Prof. Yucong Duan is revolution on the traditional mathematics with the DIKWP Semantic Mathematics through explicitly proposing: (a) mathemantics should confirm to the basic semantics instead of abstract on it. (b) mathematics is a result of thoughting or cognitive process of human being, so human interaction should not be excluded. Abstraction is actually depending on the human side and should be explicitly considerred. The fundation of abstraction is the semantics of "completeness" which is result of conscious or subconscious processing of human in the form of reasoing or "Bugs" (Prof. Yucong Duan proposed the "BUG" theory of consciousness formming). (c) As Spinoza has pointed out that everything including human thought should follow some rules. Semantics should own priority than the pure forms, which are intended to representing semantics, of the traditional mathematics. So mathematics should not be far away from semantics. Oppositely, the DIKWP Semantic Mathematics need to be adhere to the semantics to represent the real of the world.

Abstract

This document presents a comprehensive and detailed explanation of the full version of the modified Data-Information-Knowledge-Wisdom-Purpose (DIKWP) Semantic Mathematics framework, as proposed by Prof. Yucong Duan. Building upon previous investigations, critiques, and modifications, this framework addresses the paradox in traditional mathematics regarding artificial intelligence (AI) semantics. Prof. Duan argues that traditional mathematics, which abstracts away from real-world semantics, cannot adequately support the development of genuine AI understanding. The modified DIKWP Semantic Mathematics framework revolutionizes this approach by constructing mathematics in an evolutionary manner that mirrors human cognitive development, emphasizing the intrinsic integration of semantics into mathematical constructs. This document details the foundational principles, formal definitions, enhancements, implementation strategies, and potential applications of the modified framework, aiming to realign mathematics with real-world semantics and advance AI development.

Artificial intelligence seeks to create machines capable of performing tasks that typically require human intelligence, such as understanding natural language, reasoning, learning, and problem-solving. Traditional mathematics has provided the formal foundations for AI development. However, Prof. Yucong Duan identifies a fundamental paradox:

Paradox of Mathematics in AI Semantics: Traditional mathematics relies on abstractions that strip away the real-world semantics it aims to model, yet it aspires to achieve genuine AI understanding that inherently requires these very semantics. This detachment hinders AI from truly comprehending and interacting with the world as humans do.

To resolve this paradox, Prof. Duan proposes the DIKWP Semantic Mathematics framework, modified to prioritize semantics and model mathematics in a way that aligns with human cognitive processes.

The modified DIKWP Semantic Mathematics framework aims to:

1. Conform to Basic Semantics: Ground mathematical constructs in fundamental real-world semantics.

2. Integrate Human Cognitive Processes: Recognize mathematics as a product of human thought, explicitly incorporating cognitive development and interaction.

3. Prioritize Semantics over Pure Forms: Ensure that semantics take precedence over abstract forms, aligning mathematical constructs with their real-world meanings.

4. Construct Mathematics Evolutionarily: Model the evolutionary cognitive development of an infant to build a comprehensive cognitive semantic space.

5. Address Paradoxes and Limitations: Resolve issues identified in traditional mathematics, such as those related to abstraction and detachment from semantics.

The framework is built upon three fundamental semantics, from which all other concepts are evolved:

1. Sameness (Data): The recognition of shared attributes or identities between entities.

2. Difference (Information): The identification of distinctions or disparities between entities.

3. Completeness (Knowledge): The integration of all relevant attributes and relationships to form holistic concepts.

These fundamental semantics mirror the basic cognitive processes humans use to perceive and understand the world.

• Perceptual Stage: Infants begin by recognizing sensory inputs without assigned meanings.

• Conceptual Stage: Through interaction, infants associate sensory inputs to form basic concepts.

• Relational Stage: Understanding relationships and patterns between concepts emerges.

• Abstract Stage: Higher-level reasoning and abstraction develop, allowing for generalizations and complex thought.

The framework mirrors these stages by:

• Starting with basic semantic elements derived from fundamental semantics.

• Gradually building complex constructs through iterative processes.

• Forming a Cognitive Semantic Space where every concept is formally associated with its evolved semantics.

• Abstraction as a Cognitive Process: Recognized as a result of conscious and subconscious reasoning.

• Foundation in Completeness: Abstraction seeks to achieve completeness by integrating multiple concepts.

• Impact on Mathematics: Mathematical constructs should reflect the cognitive processes involved in abstraction.

• Definition: Prof. Duan's "BUG" theory suggests that inconsistencies ("bugs") in reasoning prompt cognitive growth.

• Role in Consciousness: These "bugs" lead to reflection, adaptation, and the development of consciousness.

• Inclusion in the Framework: The framework incorporates mechanisms to detect and address inconsistencies, promoting continuous learning and refinement.

• Semantics Before Form: Mathematical constructs emerge from semantic relationships, ensuring they are meaningful.

• Alignment with Reality: By prioritizing semantics, the framework ensures that mathematics accurately represents real-world phenomena.

• Detachment from Semantics: Traditional mathematics often emphasizes form over meaning, leading to abstractions disconnected from reality.

• Need for Re-alignment: Mathematics should adhere closely to semantics to be relevant and applicable to AI development.

• Entities (E): The basic units with inherent semantic content.

• Attributes (A): Properties or characteristics of entities.

• Relations (R): Semantic connections between entities.

• Entity:

  E={ei∣ei is an entity with semantic content si}E = \{ e_i \mid e_i \text{ is an entity with semantic content } s_i \}E={ei​∣ei​ is an entity with semantic content si​}

• Attribute:

  A={aj∣aj is an attribute associated with entities in E}A = \{ a_j \mid a_j \text{ is an attribute associated with entities in } E \}A={aj​∣aj​ is an attribute associated with entities in E}

• Relation:

  R={rkl∣rkl is a relation between ek and el}R = \{ r_{kl} \mid r_{kl} \text{ is a relation between } e_k \text{ and } e_l \}R={rkl​∣rkl​ is a relation between ek​ and el​}

1. Aggregation (AGG):

• Purpose: Combine entities or attributes to form a composite entity.

• Operation:

  AGG(e1,e2,...,en)=ecompositeAGG(e_1, e_2, ..., e_n) = e_{composite}AGG(e1​,e2​,...,en​)=ecomposite​

2. Differentiation (DIFF):

• Purpose: Identify differences between entities or attributes.

• Operation:

  DIFF(ei,ej)={a∣a∈A,a distinguishes ei from ej}DIFF(e_i, e_j) = \{ a \mid a \in A, a \text{ distinguishes } e_i \text{ from } e_j \}DIFF(ei​,ej​)={a∣a∈A,a distinguishes ei​ from ej​}

3. Integration (INT):

• Purpose: Integrate attributes and relations to form a complete understanding.

• Operation:

  INT(ei)={ak,rij∣ak∈A,rij∈R}INT(e_i) = \{ a_k, r_{ij} \mid a_k \in A, r_{ij} \in R \}INT(ei​)={ak​,rij​∣ak​∈A,rij​∈R}

• Inclusion of Context (C):

• Context influences the meaning of entities and relations.

• Contextual Semantic Function:

  $$CS(e,C)=s$$

• Temporal Aspect (T):

• Meanings can change over time.

• Temporal Semantic Function:

  $$TS(e,t)=s$$

• Intentionality (I):

• Purpose or intention behind entities and actions.

• Intentional Semantic Function:

  $$IS(e,I)=s$$

• Nodes: Represent entities with semantic content.

• Edges: Represent semantic relations between entities.

• Semantic Connectivity: Degree to which entities are semantically related.

• Semantic Distance: A measure of dissimilarity based on attributes and relations.

1. Level 0: Primitive Semantics

• Basic, indivisible semantic elements.

• Examples: Existence, identity, basic sensory inputs.

2. Level 1: Constructed Semantics

• Built from Level 0 elements using fundamental operations.

• Examples: Simple concepts like "red," "circle."

3. Level 2: Complex Semantics

• Combinations of Level 1 concepts and relations.

• Examples: "Red circle," "small cat."

4. Level 3 and Above: Abstract Semantics

• Higher-level abstractions and generalizations.

• Examples: "Justice," "freedom," "mathematical theories."

• Hierarchical Organization: Prevents self-referential paradoxes by restricting interactions between levels.

• Type Assignments: Enforces rules about which operations are permissible at each level.

• Abstraction as Completeness: Abstraction is the process of achieving completeness by integrating various concepts into a unified whole.

• Formal Representation:

  ABST(e1,e2,...,en)=eabstractABST(e_1, e_2, ..., e_n) = e_{abstract}ABST(e1​,e2​,...,en​)=eabstract​

• Conscious Reasoning: Deliberate, logical thought processes.

• Subconscious Processing: Implicit cognitive functions influencing understanding without conscious awareness.

• Bugs as Cognitive Stimuli: Inconsistencies prompt reevaluation and learning.

• Mechanisms:

• Error Detection: Identifying contradictions or gaps in semantic representations.

• Error Correction: Adjusting representations to resolve inconsistencies.

• Adaptive Mechanisms: The framework evolves by incorporating new information and refining existing semantics.

• Feedback Loops: Iterative processes that enhance understanding over time.

• Form Follows Meaning: Mathematical forms are derived from the underlying semantics they represent.

• Examples:

• Semantic Equations: Equations that explicitly represent semantic relationships.

• Semantic Functions: Functions that map entities to their semantic representations.

• Detachment Issue: Pure forms lack context and meaning, limiting their applicability in AI.

• Realignment: Emphasizing semantics ensures that mathematical constructs are meaningful and applicable.

• Semantic Sets: Sets defined by shared semantic attributes rather than arbitrary criteria.

• Categories: Groupings based on semantic relationships and hierarchies.

• Semantic Functions: Functions that account for the semantics of both domain and codomain elements.

• Mappings with Meaning: Relationships between sets that preserve or transform semantic content.

• Initialization: Begin with fundamental semantic elements.

• Iteration: Apply semantic operations to build complexity.

• Selection: Evaluate and retain the most coherent and meaningful constructs.

• Supervised Learning: Utilize labeled data to guide semantic development.

• Unsupervised Learning: Discover patterns and relationships without predefined labels.

• Reinforcement Learning: Use feedback mechanisms to reward meaningful semantic constructions.

• Shared Cognitive Development: AI systems evolve semantics in a manner similar to human development.

• Communication Protocols: Establish standards for semantic representations to ensure mutual understanding.

• User Interaction: Incorporate user input to refine semantic constructs.

• Collaborative Learning: AI systems learn from human expertise and vice versa.

• Modular Architecture: Design the framework to handle increasing complexity through modular components.

• Distributed Systems: Employ cloud computing and parallel processing to manage large-scale data.

• Efficient Algorithms: Develop algorithms optimized for semantic processing.

• Data Management: Implement effective storage and retrieval systems for semantic data.

• Enhanced Understanding: AI systems comprehend language with deeper semantic awareness.

• Contextual Interpretation: Improved ability to interpret meaning based on context.

• Human-Like Reasoning: AI systems emulate human cognitive processes.

• Adaptive Learning: Continuous learning and adaptation based on new information.

• Semantic Ontologies: Rich, semantically grounded ontologies that accurately represent domains.

• Interoperability: Facilitate communication between systems through shared semantics.

• Inference Engines: AI systems draw logical conclusions based on semantic relationships.

• Problem Solving: Enhanced capability to address complex problems through semantic reasoning.

• Natural Communication: Interfaces that understand and respond to human semantics.

• Personalization: Tailored experiences based on individual semantic profiles.

• Human-AI Collaboration: Systems that work alongside humans, enhancing productivity and decision-making.

• Shared Understanding: Common semantic frameworks facilitate effective collaboration.

• Understanding Cognition: Insights into human cognitive processes through modeling.

• Educational Tools: AI systems that adapt to learners' semantic understanding levels.

• Experimental Platforms: Use the framework to test hypotheses about cognition and learning.

• Data Analysis: Apply semantic processing to analyze research data.

• Hierarchical Structuring: Organize semantics into levels to manage complexity.

• Abstraction Layers: Use abstraction to simplify without losing essential semantics.

• Compatibility: Ensure the framework can interface with traditional mathematical models.

• Bridging Mechanisms: Develop translation layers between semantic mathematics and traditional forms.

• Bias Mitigation: Address potential biases in semantic representations.

• Transparency: Ensure AI decisions are explainable through semantic reasoning.

• Ethical Guidelines: Incorporate ethical considerations into the framework's development.

• Perceptual Stage: Recognize sensory inputs (e.g., trunk, branches, leaves).

• Conceptual Stage: Associate these inputs to form the concept of "tree."

• Relational Stage: Understand relationships (e.g., "trees provide shade," "trees absorb CO₂").

• Abstract Stage: Generalize to include various types of trees.

• Entity: E_tree

• Attributes: {a_trunk, a_branches, a_leaves}

• Relations: {R_provide(E_tree, E_shade), R_absorb(E_tree, E_CO₂)}

• Contextual Semantics:

• Medical Context: CS("virus", C_medical) = E_pathogen

• Computing Context: CS("virus", C_computing) = E_malware

• Outcome: AI systems accurately interpret "virus" based on context, avoiding misunderstandings.

• Traditional Formulation: The set of all sets that do not contain themselves.

• Resolution in the Framework:

• Hierarchical Levels: Sets at a given level cannot contain themselves.

• Type Theory: Assign types to sets to prevent self-referential definitions.

The modified DIKWP Semantic Mathematics framework offers a revolutionary approach to mathematics in the context of AI development. By prioritizing semantics and modeling mathematical constructs based on human cognitive processes, it addresses the paradox where traditional mathematics falls short in supporting genuine AI understanding.

Key Contributions:

• Evolutionary Construction: Reflects the cognitive development process, ensuring AI systems build understanding progressively.

• Integration of Cognitive Processes: Incorporates conscious and subconscious reasoning, acknowledging the human element in mathematics.

• Semantic Prioritization: Ensures mathematical constructs are meaningful and aligned with real-world semantics.

• Practical Implementation: Provides formal structures and strategies for building AI systems that truly comprehend and interact with the world.

Implications for AI Development:

• Enhanced Understanding: AI systems can achieve deeper comprehension, mirroring human understanding.

• Improved Interaction: Facilitates more natural and meaningful human-AI interactions.

• Advancement of Knowledge Representation: Offers robust frameworks for representing and reasoning about knowledge.

By addressing the limitations of traditional mathematics and emphasizing the intrinsic integration of semantics, the modified DIKWP Semantic Mathematics framework lays a solid foundation for the future of AI and our understanding of cognition.

• Software Platforms: Develop platforms implementing the framework for testing and validation.

• Pilot Projects: Apply the framework to specific AI applications to assess performance.

• Cognitive Science: Collaborate to refine the cognitive modeling aspects.

• Philosophy and Ethics: Engage with philosophers to address ethical considerations.

• Education: Incorporate the framework into educational curricula to explore its impact.

• Feedback Integration: Use feedback from implementations to improve the framework.

• Scalability Enhancement: Explore techniques to handle larger datasets and more complex semantics.

• Standardization: Work towards establishing the framework as a standard in AI development.

1. International Standardization Committee of Networked DIKWP for Artificial Intelligence Evaluation (DIKWP-SC),World Association of Artificial Consciousness(WAC),World Conference on Artificial Consciousness(WCAC). Standardization of DIKWP Semantic Mathematics of International Test and Evaluation Standards for Artificial Intelligence based on Networked Data-Information-Knowledge-Wisdom-Purpose (DIKWP ) Model. October 2024 DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.26233.89445 .  https://www.researchgate.net/publication/384637381_Standardization_of_DIKWP_Semantic_Mathematics_of_International_Test_and_Evaluation_Standards_for_Artificial_Intelligence_based_on_Networked_Data-Information-Knowledge-Wisdom-Purpose_DIKWP_Model

2. Piaget, J. (1952). The Origins of Intelligence in Children. International Universities Press.

3. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.

4. Spinoza, B. (1677). Ethics. (Translated editions available).

5. Chalmers, D. J. (1995). Facing Up to the Problem of Consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 2(3), 200-219.

6. Russell, B. (1903). The Principles of Mathematics. Cambridge University Press.

7. Russell, S., & Norvig, P. (2021). Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach (4th ed.). Pearson.

8. Smith, B., & Mark, D. M. (2003). Do Mountains Exist? Towards an Ontology of Landforms. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 30(3), 411-427.

9. Sowa, J. F. (2000). Knowledge Representation: Logical, Philosophical, and Computational Foundations. Brooks/Cole.

10. Barwise, J., & Etchemendy, J. (1999). Language, Proof and Logic. CSLI Publications.

I extend sincere gratitude to Prof. Yucong Duan for his pioneering work on the DIKWP Semantic Mathematics framework and for proposing the modifications that have inspired this comprehensive explanation. Appreciation is also given to researchers and scholars in cognitive science, philosophy, artificial intelligence, and related fields whose foundational contributions have informed and enriched this work.

For further discussion on the modified DIKWP Semantic Mathematics framework and its applications, please contact [Author's Name] at [Contact Information].

Keywords: DIKWP Semantic Mathematics, Modified Framework, Cognitive Semantic Space, Evolutionary Construction, Fundamental Semantics, Human Cognitive Processes, Semantics Priority, Prof. Yucong Duan, Artificial Intelligence, Knowledge Representation, Mathematical Revolution, Paradox Resolution, Semantic Networks, Cognitive Development.