Fuzzy Semantics

Semantics and syntax seem to be a major distinction in computer language development. Semantics is the meaning of the keywords. Syntax is how they are put together in a program. I have been thinking of an endeme based language for a while. It would seem that the third level might be a semantic level and that the work with semantics at level 1 and 2 might be a bit out of the natural order. Semantics is the meaning of words and since words are information that go together to make sentences and since the organization of items is at level 4 with Knowledge Representation, then semantics would be at its natural level at level 3. So an endeme based language would be naturally focused on variable definitions of semantic data.

At levels 1 and 2, there is a tight coupling between the semantic keywords of a language and their function. Their function is very precise. And it has to be because perfect operations on data are the focus of level 2. If we build a language at level 3, semantic words will still likely have some sort of function, but it would theoretically be very imprecise. At the level of precise functions, things either work or they do not.

Fuzzy Functions

At level 3, functions/actions would have fuzzy results. Is there such a thing as a fuzzy function? What would a fuzzy function be like? The timing of individual functions might be different during different runs, The conditionals could provide fuzzy logic results. Operators might provide results with probability distributions rather than specific numbers.  Other operators could provide qualitative results (endemes) rather than quantitative results. Iterators might run on different subsets of lists or in different orders on lists. Filters might be match weighting based rather than in or out based. Parameters might be there with a percentage on each rather than either there or not there. And creative operators would include randomization. maybe the most important fuzzy functions would be attached to whether something existed or not. When you work with activated fields this is an important concern.

When you work with active fields, each field is defined by an endeme. Each field has an endemeatic meaning defining what the field is. So unless the field’s endeme is an exact match for the field you are looking for using an endematic meaning, then its existence is in question. This may be the base distinction.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s