Analyzing RTE pairs from examples to small modules

Analyzing RTE pairs: from examples to small modules and reasoning issues

Action and indirection reference to the action ¢ ¢ Text: The drug that slows down or halts Alzheimer’s disease is expensive. Hypothesis: Alzheimer’s disease is treated using drugs. Answer: Yes Problem specific analysis: l ¢ Connecting “drug that slows downs or halts X” with “drug treats X”. Generalization: l l Connecting an action and an indirect reference to that action by mentioning its effect. “treat” is an action; its effects are “slows down or halt. ”

Connecting the multiple effects of an action ¢ ¢ ¢ Text: Yoko Ono unveiled a bronze statue of her late husband John Lennon. Hypothesis: Yoko Ono is John Lennon’s widow. Answer: Yes Problem specific analysis: l connecting “late husband” with “widow”. l The action dying, when married to Yoko Ono, makes John Lennon a late husband. l The same action makes Yoko Ono the widow of John Lennon. Generalization: l An action a may have effects f and g. l If f is observed and we can explain by saying that a happened, then we should be able to conclude that g is also true.

Connecting prerequisites and conditions of actions ¢ ¢ ¢ Text: John is the president of Iran. Hypothesis: John is a citizen of Iran. Answer: Yes Problem specific analysis: l To be president one has to be citizen and while being president one cannot lose citizenship l Action is “becoming a president” with the effect “be president”; the prerequisite is the condition of "being a citizen". Generalization: l Actions have prerequisites and conditions that hold when the action is being executed. l From the effect of the action, one can conclude • about the action being executed • the preconditions being true

Connecting prerequisite and effect of actions ¢ ¢ ¢ Text: Castro's speech to the United Nations General Assembly dealt blows to the U. S. government's unceasing efforts to isolate and slander Cuba. H: Castro visits the UN. Answer: Yes Problem Specific Analysis: l Connecting “giving speech at a place” to “visit a place”. l The prerequisite of action “giving speech at a place” is to “be in the place”. Castro is usually at another place (Cuba). So to be in the UN, he must do “visit UN” as that’s the only action that can guarantee that he will be in the UN. Generalization: l Suppose action a has a prerequisite g and we know action a occurred. l If initially (or normally) g is false then some action(s) must have happened to make g true.

Reasoning about intentions ¢ ¢ ¢ Text: After graduating in 1977, Gallager chose to accept a full scholarship to play football for Temple University. Hypothesis: Gallager attended Temple University. Answer: Yes Problem specific analysis: l Connecting the actions “P accepting a full scholarship to play football” to “attend university” l “accept a scholarship to play football” shows intention of attending the university l Intentions are normally executed. Generalization: l Intentions are normally executed.

Connecting prerequisite and effect of actions ¢ ¢ Text: Zhao was removed from his position as secretary general of the Communist Party of China. H: Zhao was a member of the Communist Party. Answer: Yes Problem specific analysis: l l l ¢ Connecting “position as secretary of X” to “a member of X” Action is “being a secretary” has the effect “is a secretary” “is a member” is the prerequisite of this action. Generalization: l l Action a has the effect f and prerequisite g Suppose f is observed, we know that g is true

Effect of action ¢ ¢ ¢ T: Prior to that, Andy Sipowicz began to date Assistant District Attorney Sylvia Costas. They got married in 1995 and had a son Theo in 1996. H: Sylvia Costas is the wife of Andy Sipowicz. Answer: Yes Problem specific analysis: “Andy” is typically a man’s name, Sylvia is typically a woman’s name. Marriage indicates a “wife-husband” relationship between the two subjects. Generalization: Connecting an action with the relationship it generates between subjects.

¢ ¢ ¢ T: President Vladimir Putin vowed Monday to track down the killers of Anna Politkovskaya, while her colleagues at Novaya Gazeta pledged to continue her work despite dangers. H: Anna Politkovskaya was murdered. Answer: Yes. (problem specific analysis: connecting "killers of Anna Politkovskaya" with "Anna Politkovskaya was murdered". The action "murder Anna Politkovskaya" makes people who killed Anna Politkovskaya become "killers". Generalization: An action might have effects on itself or the other agents, if we know that there exists another agent B that has the property relating to agent A and the effects of a specific action C, we can infer that agent A is carrying on action C. )

T: Vance used to be Hooper's supervisor, he said, but was let go several months ago. ¢ H: Vance worked with Hoopers. ¢

Effect of actions ¢ ¢ Text: For US pharmaceutical companies, the impending healthcare reforms promise an era of increased cost-containment and pricing controls. Hypothesis: The US government wants to keep drug prices down. Answer: Yes Problem specific analysis: l ¢ Connecting the cause of action “pricing controls of X” to “keep X prices down” through the effect “price of X is down” Generalization: l Actions a and a’ have the effect f

Effect of action and is-a relation ¢ ¢ ¢ Text: Every year Israel jails individuals simply because they refuse to perform military service for reasons of conscience. Hypothesis: People are willing to risk imprisonment rather than perform military service. Answer: Yes Problem Specific Analysis: l Connecting “jail” to “imprisonment” and “refusal to do something” to “risk punishment”. l Action “refuse to do X” has the effect of “punishment”. Imprisonment is a way of punishment. Generalization: l Suppose action a has the effect of f, and g is-a f. l Suppose g is observed, it is possible that a has occurred.

Static causal laws ¢ ¢ Text: Without a natural greenhouse effect, the temperature of the Earth would be about zero degrees F (-18 C) instead of its present 57 F (14 C). Hypothesis: Greenhouse effect changes global climate. Answer: Yes Problem Specific Analysis: l “greenhouse effect” causes “change to global climate” l non-existence of “greenhouse effect” causes “low temperature” l existence of “greenhouse effect” causes “high temperature” l low to high temperature implies change to global climate