Towards a Theory of Semantic Communication (Extended Technical Report)

Bao, Jie; Basu, Prithwish; Dean, Mike; Partridge, Craig; Swami, Ananthram; Leland, Will; Hendler, James A.

doi:10.21236/ada544137

Cited by 7 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…That has the advantage of being unambiguous, but this constraint might seem inappropriate in dealing with natural languages given the nebulous meaning of many words. However, it accords with the definition of sign: when a sign vehicle has more than one mapping to a domain, each determines a different immediate object, or the variants may constitute different signs [110,111]. A morphism may represent a domain or it may project an expectation of effects, such as a disposition of a sign user to react to a sign vehicle in a particular way; for example, a soldier responding to a command or a computer processing a type of input.…”

Section: Semioticsmentioning

confidence: 98%

A Foundation for Archival Engineering

Thibodeau

2022

Analytics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Archives comprise information that individuals and organizations use in their activities. Archival theory is the intellectual framework for organizing, managing, preserving and access to archives both while they serve the needs of those who produce them and later when researchers consult them for other purposes. Archival theory is sometimes called archival science, but it does not constitute a modern science in the sense of a coherent body of knowledge formulated in a way that is appropriate for empirical testing and validation. Both archival theory and practice are seriously challenged by the spread and continuing changes in information technology and its increasing and increasingly diverse use in human activities. This article describes problems with and controversies in archival theory and advocates for a reformulation of concepts to address the digital challenge and to make the field more robust, both by addressing the problems and by enriching its capabilities by adopting concepts from other fields such as taxonomy, semiotics and systemic functional linguistics. The objective of this reformulation is to transform the discipline on the model of modern scientific method in a way that engenders a new discipline of archival engineering that is robust enough to guide the development of automated methods even in the face of continuing and unpredictable change in IT.

show abstract

Section: Semioticsmentioning

confidence: 98%

A Foundation for Archival Engineering

Thibodeau

2022

Analytics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The first theory of semantic information was proposed by Carnap and Bar-Hillel in the early 1950s and was based on logical probabilities [174], [175]. They used logical probabilities (as opposed to the statistical probabilities used in the Shannon information theory) over the content of a sentence to quantify the amount of information in a sentence in a given language [95], [176]. In their theory, information is perceived as a set of excluded possibilities [177], and a sentence's logical probability is measured by the likelihood that it would be true in all possible situations [176].…”

Section: Theories Of Semantic Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They used logical probabilities (as opposed to the statistical probabilities used in the Shannon information theory) over the content of a sentence to quantify the amount of information in a sentence in a given language [95], [176]. In their theory, information is perceived as a set of excluded possibilities [177], and a sentence's logical probability is measured by the likelihood that it would be true in all possible situations [176]. To this end, Carnap and Bar-Hillel's semantic information theory (SIT) asserts that "A and B" provide more information than "A" or "B" (since "A and B" is less likely to be true), "A" provides more information than "A or B", and a tautology (which is always true) provides no information [176].…”

Section: Theories Of Semantic Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In their theory, information is perceived as a set of excluded possibilities [177], and a sentence's logical probability is measured by the likelihood that it would be true in all possible situations [176]. To this end, Carnap and Bar-Hillel's semantic information theory (SIT) asserts that "A and B" provide more information than "A" or "B" (since "A and B" is less likely to be true), "A" provides more information than "A or B", and a tautology (which is always true) provides no information [176]. This SIT is considered a model-theoretical approach to assign probabilistic values to logical sentences and thereby affirm a close relationship between the quantity of information in a sentence and the set of its models [176].…”

Section: Theories Of Semantic Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Semantic Communication: A Survey on Research Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions

Getu,

Kaddoum,

Bennis

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

<p> Amid the global rollout of fifth-generation (5G) services, researchers in academia, industry, and national labo?ratories have been developing proposals for the sixth generation (6G). Despite the many 6G proposals, the materialization of 6G as presently envisaged is fraught with many fundamental interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary, and transdisciplinary (IMT) challenges. To alleviate some of these challenges, semantic com?munication (SemCom) has emerged as promising 6G technology enabler. SemCom is designed to transmit only semantically?relevant information and hence help to minimize power usage, bandwidth consumption, and transmission delay. Thus, SemCom embodies a paradigm shift that can change the status quo that wireless connectivity is an opaque data pipe carrying messages whose context-dependent meaning have been ignored. On the other hand, 6G is critical for the materialization of major SemCom use cases. These paradigms of 6G for SemCom and SemCom for 6G call for a tighter integration and marriage of 6G and SemCom. To facilitate this integration and marriage, this comprehensive survey paper first provides the fundamentals of semantics and semantic information, semantic representation, semantic information, and semantic entropy. It then builds on this understanding and details the state-of-the-art research landscape of SemCom; exposes the fundamental and major challenges of SemCom; and offers promising future research directions for SemCom theories, algorithms, and realization. Accordingly, this survey article stimulates major streams of research on SemCom theories, algorithms, and implementation. </p>

show abstract

“… Although, e.g., Weaver (1949) suspected that the aspect of meaning in principle could be included and various attempts have been made to do so(Bao et al, 2011).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Joint Interaction and Mutual Understanding in Social Robotics

Schleidgen

Friedrich

2022

Sci Eng Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social robotics aims at designing robots capable of joint interaction with humans. On a conceptual level, sufficient mutual understanding is usually said to be a necessary condition for joint interaction. Against this background, the following questions remain open: in which sense is it legitimate to speak of human–robot joint interaction? What exactly does it mean to speak of humans and robots sufficiently understanding each other to account for human–robot joint interaction? Is such joint interaction effectively possible by reference, e.g., to the mere ascription or simulation of understanding? To answer these questions, we first discuss technical approaches which aim at the implementation of certain aspects of human–human communication and interaction in social robots in order to make robots accessible and understandable to humans and, hence, human–robot joint interaction possible. Second, we examine the human tendency to anthropomorphize in this context, with a view to human understanding of and joint interaction with social robots. Third, we analyze the most prominent concepts of mutual understanding and their implications for human–robot joint interaction. We conclude that it is—at least for the time being—not legitimate to speak of human–robot joint interaction, which has relevant implications both morally and ethically.

show abstract

Towards a Theory of Semantic Communication (Extended Technical Report)

Cited by 7 publications

References 42 publications

A Foundation for Archival Engineering

A Foundation for Archival Engineering

Semantic Communication: A Survey on Research Landscape, Challenges, and Future Directions

Joint Interaction and Mutual Understanding in Social Robotics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About