"Digging for Nuggets of Wisdom
By LISA GUERNSEY
Published: October 16, 2003"
"Marti Hearst, an associate professor of information systems at the University of California at Berkeley, said that text-mining analysts can suffer from overload. The visual maps that present unexpected links in data `can turn into spaghetti,' Dr. Hearst said. `You have a million links. Which one is important?`"
The "spaghetti" can be sorted-out in a binary fashion - by analyzing in terms of 'movement' with respect to WDB2T.
What does that mean?
Iff the "spaghetti" 'contains' a 'solution', there will be relative NL-P-ness, in-there, that 'points' to it, NL-P-ly.
Write the analytical software to look for this one thing.
'Course, given the 'haphazardness' that's in 'language', there's some real Difficulty in doing this - because 'language', itself, has been 'oblivious' to the NL-P.
Within a given context, this verbal symbol 'contains' [connotes] a lot, while that verbal symbol 'contains' relatively-little.
So you can't do it via analogues to 'word-counts'.
If I were to attempt it, I'd begin by analyzing words' refferential-word-counts.
That is, I'd first establish a 'dictionary' that maps the NL-P's for 'all' verbal symbols [cumulatively, as is discussed below], and and use this accumulating 'map' to evaluate the words of this or that text, while looking for the NL-P in groupings of textual items.
[What's an "NL-P of a verbal symbol"?
The degree to which its usage is 'appropriate' with respect to this or that other verbal symbol, which, in nervous system function, occurs in the form of the relative TD E/I that occurs during the "passive- or active-phase" [sensory- or motor-dominant] experiencing of a given verbal symbol sequence. [This stuff is discussed in AoK, Ap5, 6 & 7. To get a feel for it, read the "nonsense sentence" example in Ap6.] The task seems to be 'impossible' because the inherent mapping seems to be inherently 'exponential', but it's not - because all verbal symbols can be 'translated' in terms of the one TD E/I Language that always addresses only relative front-center attention [and, therefore, 'moving toward' or 'moving away from' - and that's where the ability to converge upon the NL-P arises].
Beyond this, the fact that there are a lot of words can be addressed in a cumulative way - the mapping of all word's NL-P's doesn't have to be done up-front. Just do the words as they are encountered]
The last 'step', of course, is more of the same, but occurs within nervous systems, as a Researcher ponders the outputs of machine analysis. And, in this last 'step' the Researcher goes-in with a willingness to range-widely, to determine whether or not there's actually anything in the 'nl-p' that the machine has converged upon [that is, not 'blindly' accepting the premise that the NL-P will show itself in an arbitrary case. If it hasn't, the machine analysis hasn't ranged-widely enough].
While looking for the NL-P [the WDB2T energy-gradient], test everything.
One thing that would occur as a by-product of such efforts would be the [eventual] elimination of the haphazardness which encumbers 'language'. And that'd be a Worthy accomplishment in and of itself.
Anyway, I chose to discuss this stuff because it presented an opportunity to discuss the TD E/I Language of nervous systems, and it's rigorous coupling to WDB2T's NL-P.
Why it doesn't routinely show itself during commonplace interactive dynamics derives in the way most interactive dynamics 'cling' to local-WDB2T instead of ranging-widely within Truth's One Map.
'Normal' interactive dynamics are 'strong' only with respect to 'normal' relatively-narrow 'bands' of 'familiarity' that are constructed during 'normal' experience that is relatively-narrowly-delimited by interactive 'environments' - beginning in Families.
You know - 'provincial'.
'Course, because the development of 'language' does derive in 'familiar' experience, and because 'familiar' experience does tend to be relatively-narrowly-delimited, there's a Difficulty inherent. To the degree that 'language' ranges-widely, it is 'incomprehnsible' to folks whose 'language' is relatively-narrowly-delimited :-]
[For folks who don't knee-jerk at the mention of Jesus, to my 'understanding', this's why Jesus addressed huge-wide-rangingness via humble "Parables". Look and See - He was Speaking in the TD E/I-minimization Language of nervous systems :-]
k. p. collins
"KP_PC" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:_Wcjb.179907$0v4.13808129 at bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...