JohnTan_Project2_Reflection.pdf - CS7637 KBAI Spring 2018...

This preview shows page 1 - 5 out of 14 pages.

CS7637 KBAI Spring 2018: Project 2 Reflection 1 John Tan Professor Ashok Goel CS 7637: Knowledge-Based AI March 18, 2018 Project 2 Reflection Project 1 Overview In project 1, I approached the Raven Progressive Matrice (RPM) using the visual approach. The visual approach generates a 2x2 agent that creates both vertical and horizontal relationship from A to C and A to B. It use the generate and test approach, along with the affine method to solve RPM, where the problem figures transform, rotate, and reflect from A to B or from A to C that compares to the solution figure of 1 to 6, which I call it “D” in the diagram using the root mean square (RMS). The following vertical and horizontal relationships that the 2x2 agent generates are as follows:
CS7637 KBAI Spring 2018: Project 2 Reflection 2
CS7637 KBAI Spring 2018: Project 2 Reflection 3 Throughout the image comparisons of AB with CD or AC with BD, it uses the RMS equation. The RMS equation that use to measure the difference between two images is define as the following: Homes, S., 2000, Stanford The RMS error is always between 0 and 1. If AB and CD (#) or AC and BD (#) has a RMS close to 0, it means that the comparison of AB and CD (#) or AC and BD (#) is closely related to the solution ‘#’ that is chosen as figure ‘D’. Changes in Problem Set & Agent’s Reasoning The complexity level from Project 1 to Project 2 increases from a 2x2 to a 3x3 problem set, which adds another layer of complexity and relationships. Instead of only vertical and horizontal, it is now include a diagonal direction in the 3x3 grid. The number of choices also increases from 6 to 8. In Project 2, I continue to use the
CS7637 KBAI Spring 2018: Project 2 Reflection 4 visual approach using a different knowledge of representation to solve RPM. Instead of using generate and test from the previous 2x2 problems, I use a similar approach of analysis, which is the Gestalt method where each representations of the figures are visually compared. This visual strategy for RPM “uses visual abstractions over problems to approximate the answer even without precise knowledge of the transformation between frames” (Joyner, D., 2015, GA Tech). This strategy mirrors the human cognition where we look at the trends of likelihood of the correct answer by taking a list of measurements for each individual figure and compares it against the solution figures. If the answer returns the minimum, it is the chosen answer. The measurement I use for each individual problem figures and solutions to compare is the Dark Pixel Ratio. Since I didn’t take individual shapes and edges into accounts and only care about the dark pixels, it made it easier to compute the likelihood of the possible answer when comparing the solutions with the “base” figures of A, B, C, D, E, and F. The idea of the “Dark Pixel Ratio” (DPR) comes form Dr. David Joyner’s research paper “ Using Human Computation to Acquire Novel Methods for Addressing Visual Analogy Problems on Intelligence Tests ”, which describes as “the difference in

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture