Falsifiability: Difference between revisions

From formulasearchengine
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
en>Abraitberg
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
It's hard to think about a weekend in New England's Spring and Summertime without having a person village or another taking part in host to an arts & Crafts present.<br><br>I enjoy to wander down the aisles inspecting the local artist performs and seeing all the distinct innovative choices and themes. Generally, I will quit and speak with the booth operator and see how they like the clearly show.... Imagine what it would be like to show your paintings at a community arts and craft show....<br><br><br>Yesterday, we talked about the ins and outs of conducting a prosperous artwork show with a gain or fundraiser or charity occasion. Now, its a common, for revenue demonstrate I might like to speak about. Appears to be to me we all like to go to these demonstrates until finally someone says......" Hey, you should promote your things. You are definitely great!"<br><br>Besides flattery, we'll take a look at artwork displays and believe, hey I can do this.... And why not? We don't have to make a dwelling as an artist to exhibit at these demonstrates. Just producing a content buck is all the motivation we have to have.<br>If you cherished this article so you would like to get more info relating to iwatch tv show; [http://studiomadang.com/xe/?document_srl=4250 http://studiomadang.com/xe/?document_srl=4250], i implore you to visit the webpage. I will caution you to diligently take into account which paintings to deliver. The finest, all time hits are both paintings of nearby scenes, or a typical concept. A widespread concept could be all seascapes, or all lighthouses, or all wildlife, and so on... You are going to have to have to analysis the clearly show to make a decision what may well get the job done greatest for you.<br><br>Bear in mind the inquiries we questioned for charity evens and reveals?<br>Same problem for any possible art clearly show. You have to do your investigate. Go on-line and seem up artwork displays and festivals directories and uncover as numerous in your place that you can. Search them more than and once again, the concerns to request are:<br>1. What is actually the artwork show's attendance for the past three several years? Historical past will give you an strategy no matter if or not this exhibit is expanding or declining in level of popularity.<br><br>2. What is actually the heritage for sellers? How lots of initially time distributors? How many repeat distributors? This immediately allows you know whether or not or not other sellers have viewed as this function truly worth attending.<br>3. Usually display organizers will program a dozen demonstrates in the course of the region around the season that they phone a circuit. See if the exact same suppliers show up at every single tradeshow in the circuit. Many artists make an whole year's cash flow just in the short time by signing up for all of the demonstrates inside of just one organizer's circuit.<br><br>Check it out. It can be not difficult to see a clearly show vacation a person weekend to Tucson, AZ, Upcoming to LA, then to Phoenix, than to Santa Fe, then to El Passo, then to Las Vegas and so forth. You know when an artist indicators up for all of the demonstrates on a one circuit, this is significant money for him/her.<br>So be confident to verify it out.<br>4. Speak to other artists and sellers to get their response. Will they indication-up once again following yr? How many years have they exhibited. What can make this clearly show unique for them?<br><br>5. What type of publicity promotional plans are currently being finished by the organizers? Believed attendance this 12 months? What is the major drawing electric power of the [http://www.Bing.com/search?q=exhibit&form=MSNNWS&mkt=en-us&pq=exhibit exhibit]....or what compels people to consider time off all through their useful weekend to occur to this individual exhibit.<br><br>6. What's the normal charge of goods presented by other sellers? (Why? Due to the fact if you're trying to offer $175.00 paintings and all other vendors are selling $fifteen.00 merchandise, its the incorrect group for you...)<br><br>7. What's the average profits for each event for sellers...?<br>8. What sort of other vendors will be collaborating.....? In otherwords, match up your solutions with the accurate pursuits of your audience.<br>9. What form of unique exhibit provide can you put collectively that will a lot more than deal with your costs for being at the clearly show.<br>There are several publications offered that lists arts and craft shows chroniologically or via region than date.<br><br>This is just a partial listing....<br>* Exactly where the Demonstrates Are<br>* Artwork Search<br>* Art Examiner<br>* Find Art<br>* and so on...<br>There are also tons of on-line assets accessible for your examination.<br>Furthermore, You will obtain listings of the artwork and craft reveals shown in these publication. Extra importantly, artists that attended the craft clearly show in earlier many years share their insights and opinions of their previous displays. These artists talk about the kinds of merchandise that offered perfectly, what rate position did effectively, and level if they would show up at the present yet again. Uncover the demonstrate that matches your perform!<br><br>Producing confident your artwork/craft exhibit is a results use this information as a checklist:<br>* Strategy what paintings/functions you'll carry with you.<br>* Make a decision no matter whether or not its ideal to show in the course of the trade exhibit.<br>* Normally, display organizers have a 'show manual' that lists principles, union obligations, if any, and superior types that have to be crammed out/submitted by specific dates to purchase electric power, signals, set-up moments, and so forth... Talk to about them and assure you've got followed all instructions appropriately.<br><br>Not all exhibits have them, just uncover out.<br>* Identify the forms of payment techniques you'll acknowledge. The more you have, the additional probably you may market. Options incorporate Money, Credit rating Cards, Checks, COD, PayPal and so forth. Once again, arranging will enable you out. Carry gross sales receipts and buy sorts. Test out sales tax collection guidelines and how this is to be paid out.<br><br>If you might be previously a business enterprise, you may possibly have these solutions. If its just you, then see what display administration delivers or make an arrangement with a neighboring exhibitor for credit score playing cards, etc... The essential is preparing and producing these choices forward of time.<br>* Deliver out invitations two times. 1st, three or four months in progress to all the folks on your mailing and e mail list. Announce your participation, dates, situations and that you can be offering a show particular (You should not inform them what it is, just that it will blow their socks off and its only available through the clearly show.) The second invitation is four-6 months prior to the function as a reminder.<br><br>Email your invitations once more your list two weeks prior and the monday prior the clearly show. Make confident just about every invitation is a total re-compose and won't appear like the others.<br>* Have any printed materials ready at the very least just one week before the start out of the exhibit. I would propose you put together a black and white biographical overview of by yourself, whichever art education and learning (even if its 'self-taught) you have and what you have painted and specialised in. Incorporate any shows you have attended and awards gained.<br><br>* I would also counsel that you place with each other an "Overview" sheet for each unique portray you are exhibiting. Place this jointly on black and white. Contain a awesome black and white image, Title of painting, your title as the artist, size of portray, composition the painting is on (masonite, canvas, and so forth..) and the story of your painting.<br><br>Often individuals will purchase the portray just as substantially since of the tale as the painting itself. Discuss about your inspiration for the painting, your personalized and spiritual financial investment, the colours you chose and why you really like it. Make men and women establish with you as a great deal as with the painting.<br>This is your mystery weapon. Have a great deal of copies (that amount depends on the demonstrate, and it's possible the organizers/other attending artists will suggest you). Try to remember b/w copies are only a couple pennies. Get started with a one hundred to begin with for every single portray and then gauge with each and every display you show up at.<br><br>* Place togeher a Certification of Authenticity (COA) for each individual unique painting you provide to the exhibit. This is a assertion that this is an first painting, that you are the artists and you happen to be stating this is an reliable painting by you. These certificates are pretty huge for many collectors as they adore getting the tale and qualifications of the artist as considerably as the painting itself.<br><br><br>* If you have experienced artticles penned by you or for you by newspapers or journals, provide them framed or in an attractive table leading binder.<br>* Have yet another attractive Desk Best Binder with eight&Key x ten&Prime shots of your artwork. The a lot more the superior to demonstrate your assortment of creativeness. Mark the one's sold as Offered.<br>* Have loads of company cards prepared and convey them with you.<br><br>* Determine how you happen to be heading to obtain a mailing checklist or email listing. Persons who just take the time to want to keep in contact with you are really critical persons for you. They could well develop into shoppers....they just will need to know you better prior to you get.<br>* Determine how to tastefully screen your paintings.<br>* Body your do the job.<br><br>* Think about printing up a couple of prints of your most preferred (or income makers) paintings, or submit cards as minimal-end price details.<br>* If you might be only bringing a dozen or two paintings, than deliver computer created coloration submit playing cards or shade pictures of every. As you converse with people, you can locate out if they are serious about a unique portray or not. If so, hand them a publish card of that a single portray....<br><br>Be absolutely sure to have your get hold of data, title of painting, medium made use of, dimensions created on the back again of the painting. This need to be a cropped, non-body color photograph so it fills the complete facet of a submit card. That submit card has to scream, "Purchase me, get me, obtain me!"<br>* Packup every little thing cautiously for the vacation to the present or competition.<br><br>* Arrive early and set-up promptly. Then go scout for 'non competing artists'. Just before the clearly show starts, ntroduce by yourself to non competing artists and permit them know that you will be delighted to refer men and women to their booths for their line of operate, and in exchange you would like them to do the exact for you.<br>Hand out a couple of enterprise cards to your new uncovered associates with your booth range on just about every.<br><br>* Think about having to pay a commission for any consumer that will come to your booth referred by your non competing artist partner. This tiny known method functions quite very well. Question for the exact for every single non competing artist.<br>* Through the show, be helpful. Approach individuals going to your booth. Shake their arms and speak the 'story' driving just about every of your function. Let your perform converse for alone. Pay attention to what people have to say, and if you suspect that they're actually fascinated, question them if they'd like to just take the painting household with them.<br><br>Ask for the sale. Most profits are not manufactured mainly because men and women are way too timid to question for the sale. Sales is not about expressing 'magical words' that overwhelm a customer, breaks down their limitations and compels them to invest in the portray. Sales is about building it effortless for the shopper to purchase from you.<br><br>* Remember, all arts and crafts shows and festivals have only a single purpose. To bring consumers and sellers jointly beneath one roof so that buys can be built. Your booth customer arrived organized knowing that all booths there will be competing for their bucks. Its up to you to get your unfair share.
In [[artificial intelligence]], the '''frame problem''' describes an issue with using [[First Order Logic]] (FOL) to express facts about a robot in the world. Representing the state of a robot with traditional FOL requires the use of many axioms that simply imply that things in the environment don't change arbitrarily. For example, Hayes describes a blocks world with rules about putting blocks on top of each other. In a FOL system additional axioms are required to infer facts such as a block does not change position if it's not moved. The frame problem is the problem of finding adequate collections of axioms for a viable description of a robot environment.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Hayes|first=Patrick|title=The Frame Problem and Related Problems in Artificial Intelligence|journal=University of Edinburgh|url=http://aitopics.org/sites/default/files/classic/Webber-Nilsson-Readings/Rdgs-NW-Hayes-FrameProblem.pdf}}</ref>
 
[[John McCarthy (computer scientist)|John McCarthy]] and [[Patrick J. Hayes]] defined this problem in their 1969 article, ''Some Philosophical Problems from the Standpoint of Artificial Intelligence''.  In this paper and many that came after the formal mathematical problem was a starting point for more general discussions of the difficulty of knowledge representation for artificial intelligence. Issues such as how to provide rational default assumptions and what humans consider common sense in a virtual environment.<ref>{{cite journal|last=McCarthy|first=J|coauthors=P.J. Hayes|title=Some philosophical problems from the standpoint of artificial intelligence|journal=Machine Intelligence|year=1969|volume=4|pages=463–502}}</ref>  Later, the term acquired a broader meaning in [[philosophy]], where it is formulated as the problem of limiting the beliefs that have to be updated in response to actions. In the logical context, actions are typically specified by what they change, with the implicit assumption that everything else (the frame) remains unchanged.
 
==The frame problem in artificial intelligence==
 
The frame problem occurs even in very simple domains. A scenario with a door, which can be open or closed, and a light, which can be on or off, is statically represented by two [[proposition]]s <math>\textit{open}</math> and <math>\textit{on}</math>. If these conditions can change, they are better represented by two [[Predicate (computer programming)|predicate]]s <math>\textit{open}(t)</math> and <math>\textit{on}(t)</math> that depend on time; such predicates are called [[fluent (artificial intelligence)|fluent]]s. A domain in which at time 0 the door is closed, the light is off, and the door is opened at time 1 can be directly represented in logic{{clarify|reason=What kind of logic? If ordinary predicate logic is meant, what is the purpose of the 'true →' in the 3rd formula? If some other logic (situation calculus?) is meant, it should be stated explicitly here, together with the purpose of the 'true →' (e.g. some empty action?) in that logic.|date=August 2013}} by the following formulae:
 
:<math>\neg \textit{open}(0)</math>
:<math>\neg \textit{on}(0)</math>
:<math>\textit{true} \rightarrow \textit{open}(1)</math>
 
The first two formulae represent the initial situation; the third formula represents the effect of executing the action of opening the door at time 1. If such an action had preconditions, such as the door must not be locked, it would have been represented by <math>\neg \textit{locked}(0) \rightarrow \textit{open}(1)</math>. In practice, one would have a predicate <math>\textit{executeopen}(t)</math> for specifying when an action is executed and a rule <math>\forall t . \textit{executeopen}(t) \wedge \textit{true} \rightarrow \textit{open}(t+1)</math> for specifying the effects of actions. The article on the [[situation calculus]] gives more details.
 
While the three formulae above are a direct expression in logic of what is known, they do not suffice to correctly draw consequences. While the following conditions (representing the expected situation) are consistent with the three formulae above, they are not the only ones.
 
:{|
| <math>\neg \textit{open}(0)</math> &nbsp; &nbsp;  || <math>\textit{open}(1)</math>
|-
| <math>\neg \textit{on}(0)</math>   || <math>\neg \textit{on}(1)</math>
|}
 
Indeed, another set of conditions that is consistent with the three formulae above is:
 
:{|
| <math>\neg \textit{open}(0)</math> &nbsp; &nbsp;  || <math>\textit{open}(1)</math>
|-
| <math>\neg \textit{on}(0)</math>  || <math>\textit{on}(1)</math>
|}
 
The frame problem is that specifying only which conditions are changed by the actions do not allow, in logic, to conclude that all other conditions are not changed. This problem can be solved by adding the so-called “frame axioms”, which explicitly specify that all conditions not affected by actions are not changed while executing that action. For example, since the action executed at time 0 is that of opening the door, a frame axiom would state that the status of the light does not change from time 0 to time 1:
 
:<math>\textit{on}(0) \leftrightarrow \textit{on}(1)</math>
 
The frame problem is that one such frame axiom is necessary for every pair of action and condition such that the action does not affect the condition.{{clarify|reason=Shouldn't then the frame axiom be the following modification of the above rule: '∀t.executeopen(t)→open(t+1)∧(on(t+1)↔on(t))' ? In contrast, the formula 'on(0)↔on(1)' seems to be too particular taylored to the 'executeopen(0)' situation.|date=August 2013}} In other words, the problem is that of formalizing a dynamical domain without explicitly specifying the frame axioms.
 
The solution proposed by McCarthy to solve this problem involves assuming that a minimal amount of condition changes have occurred; this solution is formalized using the framework of [[Circumscription (logic)|circumscription]]. The [[Yale shooting problem]], however, shows that this solution is not always correct. Alternative solutions were then proposed, involving predicate completion, fluent occlusion, [[successor state axiom]]s, etc.; they are explained below. By the end of the 1980s, the frame problem as defined by McCarthy and Hayes was solved{{clarify|reason=Mention the (combination of) approach(es) by which the frame problem was solved.|date=August 2013}}. Even after that, however, the term “frame problem” was still used, in part to refer to the same problem but under different settings (e.g., concurrent actions), and in part to refer to the general problem of representing and reasoning with dynamical domains.
 
== Solutions to the frame problem ==
 
In the following, how the frame problem is solved in various formalisms is shown. The formalisms themselves are not presented in full: what is presented are simplified versions that are however sufficient to show how the frame problem is solved.
 
===The fluent occlusion solution===
 
This solution was proposed by [[Erik Sandewall]], who also defined a [[formal language]] for the specification of dynamical domains; therefore, such a domain can be first expressed in this language and then automatically translated into logic. In this article, only the expression in logic is shown, and only in the simplified language with no action names.
 
The rationale of this solution is to represent not only the value of conditions over time, but also whether they can be affected by the last executed action. The latter is represented by another condition, called occlusion. A condition is said to be ''occluded'' in a given time point if an action has been just executed that makes the condition true or false as an effect. Occlusion can be viewed as “permission to change”: if a condition is occluded, it is relieved from obeying the constraint of inertia.
 
In the simplified example of the door and the light, occlusion can be formalized by two predicates <math>\textit{occludeopen}(t)</math> and <math>\textit{occludeon}(t)</math>. The rationale is that a condition can change value only if the corresponding occlusion predicate is true at the next time point. In turn, the occlusion predicate is true only when an action affecting the condition is executed.
 
:<math>\neg \textit{open}(0)</math>
:<math>\neg \textit{on}(0)</math>
:<math>\textit{true} \rightarrow \textit{open}(1) \wedge \textit{occludeopen}(1)</math>
:<math>\forall t . \neg \textit{occludeopen}(t) \rightarrow (\textit{open}(t-1) \leftrightarrow \textit{open}(t))</math>
:<math>\forall t . \neg \textit{occludeon}(t) \rightarrow (\textit{on}(t-1) \leftrightarrow \textit{on}(t))</math>
 
In general, every action making a condition true or false also makes the corresponding occlusion predicate true. In this case, <math>\textit{occludeopen}(1)</math> is true, making the antecedent of the fourth formula above false for <math>t=1</math>; therefore, the constraint that <math>\textit{open}(t-1) \leftrightarrow \textit{open}(t)</math> does not hold for <math>t=1</math>. Therefore, <math>\textit{open}</math> can change value, which is also what is enforced by the third formula.
 
In order for this condition to work, occlusion predicates have to be true only when they are made true as an effect of an action. This can be achieved either by [[Circumscription (logic)|circumscription]] or by predicate completion. It is worth noticing that occlusion does not necessarily imply a change: for example, executing the action of opening the door when it was already open (in the formalization above) makes the predicate <math>\textit{occludeopen}</math> true and makes <math>\textit{open}</math> true; however, <math>\textit{open}</math> has not changed value, as it was true already.
 
===The predicate completion solution===
 
This encoding is similar to the fluent occlusion solution, but the additional predicates denote change, not permission to change. For example, <math>\textit{changeopen}(t)</math> represents the fact that the predicate <math>\textit{open}</math> will change from time <math>t</math> to <math>t+1</math>. As a result, a predicate changes if and only if the corresponding change predicate is true. An action results in a change if and only if it makes true a condition that was previously false or vice versa.
 
:<math>\neg \textit{open}(0)</math>
:<math>\neg \textit{on}(0)</math>
:<math>\neg \textit{open}(0) \wedge \textit{true} \rightarrow \textit{changeopen}(0)</math>
:<math>\forall t. \textit{changeopen}(t) \leftrightarrow (\neg \textit{open}(t) \leftrightarrow \textit{open}(t+1))</math>
:<math>\forall t. \textit{changeon}(t) \leftrightarrow (\neg \textit{on}(t) \leftrightarrow \textit{on}(t+1))</math>
 
The third formula is a different way of saying that opening the door causes the door to be opened. Precisely, it states that opening the door changes the state of the door if it had been previously closed. The last two conditions state that a condition changes value at time <math>t</math> if and only if the corresponding change predicate is true at time <math>t</math>. To complete the solution, the time points in which the change predicates are true have to be as few as possible, and this can be done by applying predicate completion to the rules specifying the effects of actions.
 
===The successor state axioms solution===
 
The value of a condition after the execution of an action can be determined by
the fact that the condition is true if and only if:
 
# the action makes the condition true; or
# the condition was previously true and the action does not make it false.
 
A [[successor state axiom]] is a formalization in logic of these two facts. For
example, if <math>\textit{opendoor}(t)</math> and <math>\textit{closedoor}(t)</math> are two
conditions used to denote that the action executed at time <math>t</math> was
to open or close the door, respectively, the running example is encoded as
follows.
 
: <math>\neg \textit{open}(0)</math>
: <math>\neg \textit{on}(0)</math>
: <math>\textit{opendoor}(0)</math>
: <math>\forall t . \textit{open}(t+1) \leftrightarrow \textit{opendoor}(t) \vee (\textit{open}(t) \wedge \neg \textit{closedoor}(t))</math>
 
This solution is centered around the value of conditions, rather than the
effects of actions. In other words, there is an axiom for every condition,
rather than a formula for every action. Preconditions to actions (which are not
present in this example) are formalized by other formulae. The successor state
axioms are used in the variant to the [[situation calculus]] proposed by
[[Ray Reiter]].
 
===The fluent calculus solution===
 
The [[fluent calculus]] is a variant of the situation calculus. It solves the frame problem by using first-order logic
[[First-order logic#Formation rules|terms]], rather than predicates, to represent the states. Converting
predicates into terms in first order logic is called [[Reification (knowledge representation)|reification]]; the
fluent calculus can be seen as a logic in which predicates representing the
state of conditions are reified.
 
The difference between a predicate and a term in first order logic is that a term is a representation of an object (possibly a complex object composed of other objects), while a predicate represents a condition that can be true or false when evaluated over a given set of terms.
 
In the fluent calculus, each possible state is represented by a term obtained by composition of other terms, each one representing the conditions that are true in state. For example, the state in which the door is open and the light is on is represented by the term <math>\textit{open} \circ \textit{on}</math>. It is important to notice that a term is not true or false by itself, as it is an object and not a condition. In other words, the term <math>\textit{open} \circ \textit{on}</math> represent a possible state, and does not by itself mean that this is the current state. A separate condition can be stated to specify that this is actually the state at a given time, e.g., <math>\textit{state}(\textit{open} \circ \textit{on}, 10)</math> means that this is the state at time <math>10</math>.
 
The solution to the frame problem given in the fluent calculus is to specify the effects of actions by stating how a term representing the state changes when the action is executed. For example, the action of opening the door at time 0 is represented by the formula:
 
: <math>\textit{state}(s \circ \textit{open}, 1) \leftrightarrow \textit{state}(s,0)</math>
 
The action of closing the door, which makes a condition false instead of true, is represented in a slightly different way:
 
: <math>\textit{state}(s, 1) \leftrightarrow \textit{state}(s \circ \textit{open}, 0)</math>
 
This formula works provided that suitable axioms are given about <math>\textit{state}</math> and <math>\circ</math>, e.g., a term containing two times the same condition is not a valid state (for example, <math>\textit{state}(\textit{open} \circ s \circ \textit{open}, t)</math> is always false for every <math>s</math> and <math>t</math>).
 
===The event calculus solution===
 
The [[event calculus]] uses terms for representing fluents, like the fluent calculus, but also has axioms constraining the value of fluents, like the successor state axioms. In the event calculus, inertia is enforced by formulae stating that a fluent is true if it has been true at a given previous time point and no action changing it to false has been performed in the meantime. Predicate completion is still needed in the event calculus for obtaining that a fluent is made true only if an action making it true has been performed, but also for obtaining that an action had been performed only if that is explicitly stated.
 
===The default logic solution===
 
The frame problem can be thought of as the problem of formalizing the principle that, by default, "everything is presumed to remain in the state in which it is" ([[Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz|Leibniz]], "An Introduction to a Secret Encyclopædia", ''c''. 1679).  This default, sometimes called the ''commonsense law of inertia'', was expressed by [[Raymond Reiter]] in [[default logic]]:
 
: <math>\frac{R(x,s)\; :\ R(x,\textit{do}(a,s))}{R(x,\textit{do}(a,s))}</math>
 
(if <math>R(x)</math> is true in situation <math>s</math>, and it can be assumed<ref>i.e., no contradicting information is known</ref> that <math>R(x)</math> remains true after executing action <math>a</math>, then we can conclude that <math>R(x)</math> remains true).
 
Steve Hanks and [[Drew McDermott]] argued, on the basis of their [[Yale shooting problem|Yale shooting]] example, that this solution to the frame problem is unsatisfactory.  Hudson Turner showed, however, that it works correctly in the presence of appropriate additional postulates.
 
===The answer set programming solution===
 
The counterpart of the default logic solution in the language of [[answer set programming]] is a rule with [[stable model semantics#Strong negation|strong negation]]:
 
:<math>r(X,T+1) \leftarrow r(X,T),\ \hbox{not }\sim r(X,T+1)</math>
 
(if <math>r(X)</math> is true at time <math>T</math>, and it can be assumed that <math>r(X)</math> remains true at time <math>T+1</math>, then we can conclude that <math>r(X)</math> remains true).
 
===Action description languages===
 
[[Action description language]]s elude the frame problem rather than solving it. An action description language is a formal language with a syntax that is specific for describing situations and actions. For example, that the action <math>\textit{opendoor}</math> makes the door open if not locked is expressed by:
 
: <math>\textit{opendoor}</math> causes <math>\textit{open}</math> if <math>\neg \textit{locked}</math>
 
The semantics of an action description language depends on what the language can express (concurrent actions, delayed effects, etc.) and is usually based on [[transition system]]s.
 
Since domains are expressed in these languages rather than directly in logic, the frame problem only arises when a specification given in an action description logic is to be translated into logic. Typically, however, a translation is given from these languages to [[answer set programming]] rather than first-order logic.
 
==See also==
* [[Binding problem]]
* [[Common sense]]
* [[Defeasible reasoning]]
* [[Non-monotonic logic]]
* [[Symbol grounding]]
* [[Linear logic]]
 
==References==
 
{{reflist}}<!---should better go elsewhere?--->
 
* J. McCarthy and P. J. Hayes (1969). [http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/mcchay69.html Some philosophical problems from the standpoint of artificial intelligence]. ''Machine Intelligence'', 4:463-502.
 
* E. Sandewall (1972), An approach to the Frame Problem and its Implementation, ''Machine Intelligence'', 7:195–204.
 
* J. McCarthy (1986). [http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/applications.html Applications of circumscription to formalizing common-sense knowledge]. ''Artificial Intelligence'', 28:89-116.
 
* S. Hanks and D. McDermott (1987). Nonmonotonic logic and temporal projection. ''Artificial Intelligence'', 33(3):379-412.
 
* [[Raymond Reiter|R. Reiter]] (1991). The frame problem in the situation calculus: a simple solution (sometimes) and a completeness result for goal regression. In Vladimir Lifschitz, editor, ''Artificial Intelligence and Mathematical Theory of Computation: Papers in Honor of John McCarthy'', pages 359-380. Academic Press, New York.
 
* M. Gelfond and V. Lifschitz (1993). Representing action and change by logic programs. ''Journal of Logic Programming'', 17:301-322.
 
* E. Sandewall (1994), [http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=203299&dl=ACM&coll=portal Features and Fluents], Oxford University Press.
 
* E. Sandewall and Y. Shoham (1995), [http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=216143&coll=GUIDE&dl=GUIDE&CFID=19734324&CFTOKEN=92855999 Non-monotonic Temporal Reasoning], in D. M. Gabbay, C. J. Hogger and J. A. Robinson eds., ''Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming'', vol. 4, ch. 7, p.&nbsp;439–498, Oxford University Press.
 
* J.A. Toth (1995). Book review. Kenneth M. and Patrick J. Hayes, eds., ''Reasoning agents in a dynamic world: The frame problem. Artificial Intelligence,'' 73:323-369.
 
* M. Shanahan (1997). Solving the frame problem: A mathematical investigation of the common sense law of inertia. MIT Press.
 
* P. Liberatore (1997). [http://www.ep.liu.se/ej/etai/1997/002 The complexity of the language A]. ''[[Electronic Transactions on Artificial Intelligence]]'', 1(1-3):13-37.
 
* E. Sandewall (1998). [http://www.ep.liu.se/ej/etai/1998/010 Cognitive robotics logic and its metatheory: Features and fluents revisited]. ''Electronic Transactions on Artificial Intelligence'', 2(3-4):307-329.
 
* M. Gelfond and V. Lifschitz (1998). [http://www.ep.liu.se/ej/etai/1998/007 Action languages]. ''Electronic Transactions on Artificial Intelligence'', 2(3-4):193-210.
 
* H. Levesque, F. Pirri, and [[Raymond Reiter|R. Reiter]] (1998). [http://www.ep.liu.se/ej/etai/1998/005 Foundations for the situation calculus]. ''Electronic Transactions on Artificial Intelligence'', 2(3-4):159-178.
 
* F. Pirri and R. Reiter (1999). Some contributions to the metatheory of the Situation Calculus. ''[[Journal of the ACM]]'', 46(3):325–361. {{doi|10.1145/316542.316545}}
 
* P. Doherty, J. Gustafsson, L. Karlsson, and J. Kvarnström (1998). [http://www.ep.liu.se/ej/etai/1998/009 TAL: Temporal action logics language specification and tutorial]. ''Electronic Transactions on Artificial Intelligence'', 2(3-4):273-306.
 
* M. Thielscher (1998). [http://www.ep.liu.se/ej/etai/1998/006 Introduction to the fluent calculus]. ''Electronic Transactions on Artificial Intelligence'', 2(3-4):179-192.
 
* R. Miller and M. Shanahan (1999). [http://www.ida.liu.se/ext/epa/ej/etai/1999/016/epapage.html The event-calculus in classical logic - alternative axiomatizations]. ''Electronic Transactions on Artificial Intelligence'', 3(1):77-105.
 
* [[Raymond Reiter|R. Reiter]] (1980).  A logic for default reasoning. ''Artificial Intelligence'', 13:81-132.
 
* H. Turner (1997) [http://www.d.umn.edu/~hudson/papers/ralpdt6.pdf Representing actions in logic programs and default theories: a situation calculus approach]. ''Journal of Logic Programming'', 31:245-298.
 
* V. Lifschitz (2012) [http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~vl/papers/jmc.pdf The frame problem, then and now]. Talk at Celebration of John McCarthy's Accomplishments, Stanford University, March 25, 2012.
 
==External links==
* {{SEP|frame-problem}}
* [http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/mcchay69/mcchay69.html Some Philosophical Problems from the Standpoint of Artificial Intelligence]; the original article of McCarthy and Hayes that proposed the problem.
 
{{John McCarthy navbox}}
 
[[Category:Artificial intelligence]]
[[Category:Knowledge representation]]
[[Category:Epistemology]]
[[Category:Logic programming]]
[[Category:Philosophical problems]]

Revision as of 23:51, 27 January 2014

In artificial intelligence, the frame problem describes an issue with using First Order Logic (FOL) to express facts about a robot in the world. Representing the state of a robot with traditional FOL requires the use of many axioms that simply imply that things in the environment don't change arbitrarily. For example, Hayes describes a blocks world with rules about putting blocks on top of each other. In a FOL system additional axioms are required to infer facts such as a block does not change position if it's not moved. The frame problem is the problem of finding adequate collections of axioms for a viable description of a robot environment.[1]

John McCarthy and Patrick J. Hayes defined this problem in their 1969 article, Some Philosophical Problems from the Standpoint of Artificial Intelligence. In this paper and many that came after the formal mathematical problem was a starting point for more general discussions of the difficulty of knowledge representation for artificial intelligence. Issues such as how to provide rational default assumptions and what humans consider common sense in a virtual environment.[2] Later, the term acquired a broader meaning in philosophy, where it is formulated as the problem of limiting the beliefs that have to be updated in response to actions. In the logical context, actions are typically specified by what they change, with the implicit assumption that everything else (the frame) remains unchanged.

The frame problem in artificial intelligence

The frame problem occurs even in very simple domains. A scenario with a door, which can be open or closed, and a light, which can be on or off, is statically represented by two propositions open and on. If these conditions can change, they are better represented by two predicates open(t) and on(t) that depend on time; such predicates are called fluents. A domain in which at time 0 the door is closed, the light is off, and the door is opened at time 1 can be directly represented in logicTemplate:Clarify by the following formulae:

¬open(0)
¬on(0)
trueopen(1)

The first two formulae represent the initial situation; the third formula represents the effect of executing the action of opening the door at time 1. If such an action had preconditions, such as the door must not be locked, it would have been represented by ¬locked(0)open(1). In practice, one would have a predicate executeopen(t) for specifying when an action is executed and a rule t.executeopen(t)trueopen(t+1) for specifying the effects of actions. The article on the situation calculus gives more details.

While the three formulae above are a direct expression in logic of what is known, they do not suffice to correctly draw consequences. While the following conditions (representing the expected situation) are consistent with the three formulae above, they are not the only ones.

¬open(0)     open(1)
¬on(0) ¬on(1)

Indeed, another set of conditions that is consistent with the three formulae above is:

¬open(0)     open(1)
¬on(0) on(1)

The frame problem is that specifying only which conditions are changed by the actions do not allow, in logic, to conclude that all other conditions are not changed. This problem can be solved by adding the so-called “frame axioms”, which explicitly specify that all conditions not affected by actions are not changed while executing that action. For example, since the action executed at time 0 is that of opening the door, a frame axiom would state that the status of the light does not change from time 0 to time 1:

on(0)on(1)

The frame problem is that one such frame axiom is necessary for every pair of action and condition such that the action does not affect the condition.Template:Clarify In other words, the problem is that of formalizing a dynamical domain without explicitly specifying the frame axioms.

The solution proposed by McCarthy to solve this problem involves assuming that a minimal amount of condition changes have occurred; this solution is formalized using the framework of circumscription. The Yale shooting problem, however, shows that this solution is not always correct. Alternative solutions were then proposed, involving predicate completion, fluent occlusion, successor state axioms, etc.; they are explained below. By the end of the 1980s, the frame problem as defined by McCarthy and Hayes was solvedTemplate:Clarify. Even after that, however, the term “frame problem” was still used, in part to refer to the same problem but under different settings (e.g., concurrent actions), and in part to refer to the general problem of representing and reasoning with dynamical domains.

Solutions to the frame problem

In the following, how the frame problem is solved in various formalisms is shown. The formalisms themselves are not presented in full: what is presented are simplified versions that are however sufficient to show how the frame problem is solved.

The fluent occlusion solution

This solution was proposed by Erik Sandewall, who also defined a formal language for the specification of dynamical domains; therefore, such a domain can be first expressed in this language and then automatically translated into logic. In this article, only the expression in logic is shown, and only in the simplified language with no action names.

The rationale of this solution is to represent not only the value of conditions over time, but also whether they can be affected by the last executed action. The latter is represented by another condition, called occlusion. A condition is said to be occluded in a given time point if an action has been just executed that makes the condition true or false as an effect. Occlusion can be viewed as “permission to change”: if a condition is occluded, it is relieved from obeying the constraint of inertia.

In the simplified example of the door and the light, occlusion can be formalized by two predicates occludeopen(t) and occludeon(t). The rationale is that a condition can change value only if the corresponding occlusion predicate is true at the next time point. In turn, the occlusion predicate is true only when an action affecting the condition is executed.

¬open(0)
¬on(0)
trueopen(1)occludeopen(1)
t.¬occludeopen(t)(open(t1)open(t))
t.¬occludeon(t)(on(t1)on(t))

In general, every action making a condition true or false also makes the corresponding occlusion predicate true. In this case, occludeopen(1) is true, making the antecedent of the fourth formula above false for t=1; therefore, the constraint that open(t1)open(t) does not hold for t=1. Therefore, open can change value, which is also what is enforced by the third formula.

In order for this condition to work, occlusion predicates have to be true only when they are made true as an effect of an action. This can be achieved either by circumscription or by predicate completion. It is worth noticing that occlusion does not necessarily imply a change: for example, executing the action of opening the door when it was already open (in the formalization above) makes the predicate occludeopen true and makes open true; however, open has not changed value, as it was true already.

The predicate completion solution

This encoding is similar to the fluent occlusion solution, but the additional predicates denote change, not permission to change. For example, changeopen(t) represents the fact that the predicate open will change from time t to t+1. As a result, a predicate changes if and only if the corresponding change predicate is true. An action results in a change if and only if it makes true a condition that was previously false or vice versa.

¬open(0)
¬on(0)
¬open(0)truechangeopen(0)
t.changeopen(t)(¬open(t)open(t+1))
t.changeon(t)(¬on(t)on(t+1))

The third formula is a different way of saying that opening the door causes the door to be opened. Precisely, it states that opening the door changes the state of the door if it had been previously closed. The last two conditions state that a condition changes value at time t if and only if the corresponding change predicate is true at time t. To complete the solution, the time points in which the change predicates are true have to be as few as possible, and this can be done by applying predicate completion to the rules specifying the effects of actions.

The successor state axioms solution

The value of a condition after the execution of an action can be determined by the fact that the condition is true if and only if:

  1. the action makes the condition true; or
  2. the condition was previously true and the action does not make it false.

A successor state axiom is a formalization in logic of these two facts. For example, if opendoor(t) and closedoor(t) are two conditions used to denote that the action executed at time t was to open or close the door, respectively, the running example is encoded as follows.

¬open(0)
¬on(0)
opendoor(0)
t.open(t+1)opendoor(t)(open(t)¬closedoor(t))

This solution is centered around the value of conditions, rather than the effects of actions. In other words, there is an axiom for every condition, rather than a formula for every action. Preconditions to actions (which are not present in this example) are formalized by other formulae. The successor state axioms are used in the variant to the situation calculus proposed by Ray Reiter.

The fluent calculus solution

The fluent calculus is a variant of the situation calculus. It solves the frame problem by using first-order logic terms, rather than predicates, to represent the states. Converting predicates into terms in first order logic is called reification; the fluent calculus can be seen as a logic in which predicates representing the state of conditions are reified.

The difference between a predicate and a term in first order logic is that a term is a representation of an object (possibly a complex object composed of other objects), while a predicate represents a condition that can be true or false when evaluated over a given set of terms.

In the fluent calculus, each possible state is represented by a term obtained by composition of other terms, each one representing the conditions that are true in state. For example, the state in which the door is open and the light is on is represented by the term openon. It is important to notice that a term is not true or false by itself, as it is an object and not a condition. In other words, the term openon represent a possible state, and does not by itself mean that this is the current state. A separate condition can be stated to specify that this is actually the state at a given time, e.g., state(openon,10) means that this is the state at time 10.

The solution to the frame problem given in the fluent calculus is to specify the effects of actions by stating how a term representing the state changes when the action is executed. For example, the action of opening the door at time 0 is represented by the formula:

state(sopen,1)state(s,0)

The action of closing the door, which makes a condition false instead of true, is represented in a slightly different way:

state(s,1)state(sopen,0)

This formula works provided that suitable axioms are given about state and , e.g., a term containing two times the same condition is not a valid state (for example, state(opensopen,t) is always false for every s and t).

The event calculus solution

The event calculus uses terms for representing fluents, like the fluent calculus, but also has axioms constraining the value of fluents, like the successor state axioms. In the event calculus, inertia is enforced by formulae stating that a fluent is true if it has been true at a given previous time point and no action changing it to false has been performed in the meantime. Predicate completion is still needed in the event calculus for obtaining that a fluent is made true only if an action making it true has been performed, but also for obtaining that an action had been performed only if that is explicitly stated.

The default logic solution

The frame problem can be thought of as the problem of formalizing the principle that, by default, "everything is presumed to remain in the state in which it is" (Leibniz, "An Introduction to a Secret Encyclopædia", c. 1679). This default, sometimes called the commonsense law of inertia, was expressed by Raymond Reiter in default logic:

R(x,s):R(x,do(a,s))R(x,do(a,s))

(if R(x) is true in situation s, and it can be assumed[3] that R(x) remains true after executing action a, then we can conclude that R(x) remains true).

Steve Hanks and Drew McDermott argued, on the basis of their Yale shooting example, that this solution to the frame problem is unsatisfactory. Hudson Turner showed, however, that it works correctly in the presence of appropriate additional postulates.

The answer set programming solution

The counterpart of the default logic solution in the language of answer set programming is a rule with strong negation:

r(X,T+1)r(X,T),not r(X,T+1)

(if r(X) is true at time T, and it can be assumed that r(X) remains true at time T+1, then we can conclude that r(X) remains true).

Action description languages

Action description languages elude the frame problem rather than solving it. An action description language is a formal language with a syntax that is specific for describing situations and actions. For example, that the action opendoor makes the door open if not locked is expressed by:

opendoor causes open if ¬locked

The semantics of an action description language depends on what the language can express (concurrent actions, delayed effects, etc.) and is usually based on transition systems.

Since domains are expressed in these languages rather than directly in logic, the frame problem only arises when a specification given in an action description logic is to be translated into logic. Typically, however, a translation is given from these languages to answer set programming rather than first-order logic.

See also

References

43 year old Petroleum Engineer Harry from Deep River, usually spends time with hobbies and interests like renting movies, property developers in singapore new condominium and vehicle racing. Constantly enjoys going to destinations like Camino Real de Tierra Adentro.

  • E. Sandewall (1972), An approach to the Frame Problem and its Implementation, Machine Intelligence, 7:195–204.
  • S. Hanks and D. McDermott (1987). Nonmonotonic logic and temporal projection. Artificial Intelligence, 33(3):379-412.
  • R. Reiter (1991). The frame problem in the situation calculus: a simple solution (sometimes) and a completeness result for goal regression. In Vladimir Lifschitz, editor, Artificial Intelligence and Mathematical Theory of Computation: Papers in Honor of John McCarthy, pages 359-380. Academic Press, New York.
  • M. Gelfond and V. Lifschitz (1993). Representing action and change by logic programs. Journal of Logic Programming, 17:301-322.
  • E. Sandewall and Y. Shoham (1995), Non-monotonic Temporal Reasoning, in D. M. Gabbay, C. J. Hogger and J. A. Robinson eds., Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, vol. 4, ch. 7, p. 439–498, Oxford University Press.
  • J.A. Toth (1995). Book review. Kenneth M. and Patrick J. Hayes, eds., Reasoning agents in a dynamic world: The frame problem. Artificial Intelligence, 73:323-369.
  • M. Shanahan (1997). Solving the frame problem: A mathematical investigation of the common sense law of inertia. MIT Press.
  • M. Gelfond and V. Lifschitz (1998). Action languages. Electronic Transactions on Artificial Intelligence, 2(3-4):193-210.
  • F. Pirri and R. Reiter (1999). Some contributions to the metatheory of the Situation Calculus. Journal of the ACM, 46(3):325–361. 21 year-old Glazier James Grippo from Edam, enjoys hang gliding, industrial property developers in singapore developers in singapore and camping. Finds the entire world an motivating place we have spent 4 months at Alejandro de Humboldt National Park.
  • R. Reiter (1980). A logic for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 13:81-132.

External links

Template:John McCarthy navbox

  1. One of the biggest reasons investing in a Singapore new launch is an effective things is as a result of it is doable to be lent massive quantities of money at very low interest rates that you should utilize to purchase it. Then, if property values continue to go up, then you'll get a really high return on funding (ROI). Simply make sure you purchase one of the higher properties, reminiscent of the ones at Fernvale the Riverbank or any Singapore landed property Get Earnings by means of Renting

    In its statement, the singapore property listing - website link, government claimed that the majority citizens buying their first residence won't be hurt by the new measures. Some concessions can even be prolonged to chose teams of consumers, similar to married couples with a minimum of one Singaporean partner who are purchasing their second property so long as they intend to promote their first residential property. Lower the LTV limit on housing loans granted by monetary establishments regulated by MAS from 70% to 60% for property purchasers who are individuals with a number of outstanding housing loans on the time of the brand new housing purchase. Singapore Property Measures - 30 August 2010 The most popular seek for the number of bedrooms in Singapore is 4, followed by 2 and three. Lush Acres EC @ Sengkang

    Discover out more about real estate funding in the area, together with info on international funding incentives and property possession. Many Singaporeans have been investing in property across the causeway in recent years, attracted by comparatively low prices. However, those who need to exit their investments quickly are likely to face significant challenges when trying to sell their property – and could finally be stuck with a property they can't sell. Career improvement programmes, in-house valuation, auctions and administrative help, venture advertising and marketing, skilled talks and traisning are continuously planned for the sales associates to help them obtain better outcomes for his or her shoppers while at Knight Frank Singapore. No change Present Rules

    Extending the tax exemption would help. The exemption, which may be as a lot as $2 million per family, covers individuals who negotiate a principal reduction on their existing mortgage, sell their house short (i.e., for lower than the excellent loans), or take part in a foreclosure course of. An extension of theexemption would seem like a common-sense means to assist stabilize the housing market, but the political turmoil around the fiscal-cliff negotiations means widespread sense could not win out. Home Minority Chief Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) believes that the mortgage relief provision will be on the table during the grand-cut price talks, in response to communications director Nadeam Elshami. Buying or promoting of blue mild bulbs is unlawful.

    A vendor's stamp duty has been launched on industrial property for the primary time, at rates ranging from 5 per cent to 15 per cent. The Authorities might be trying to reassure the market that they aren't in opposition to foreigners and PRs investing in Singapore's property market. They imposed these measures because of extenuating components available in the market." The sale of new dual-key EC models will even be restricted to multi-generational households only. The models have two separate entrances, permitting grandparents, for example, to dwell separately. The vendor's stamp obligation takes effect right this moment and applies to industrial property and plots which might be offered inside three years of the date of buy. JLL named Best Performing Property Brand for second year running

    The data offered is for normal info purposes only and isn't supposed to be personalised investment or monetary advice. Motley Fool Singapore contributor Stanley Lim would not personal shares in any corporations talked about. Singapore private home costs increased by 1.eight% within the fourth quarter of 2012, up from 0.6% within the earlier quarter. Resale prices of government-built HDB residences which are usually bought by Singaporeans, elevated by 2.5%, quarter on quarter, the quickest acquire in five quarters. And industrial property, prices are actually double the levels of three years ago. No withholding tax in the event you sell your property. All your local information regarding vital HDB policies, condominium launches, land growth, commercial property and more

    There are various methods to go about discovering the precise property. Some local newspapers (together with the Straits Instances ) have categorised property sections and many local property brokers have websites. Now there are some specifics to consider when buying a 'new launch' rental. Intended use of the unit Every sale begins with 10 p.c low cost for finish of season sale; changes to 20 % discount storewide; follows by additional reduction of fiftyand ends with last discount of 70 % or extra. Typically there is even a warehouse sale or transferring out sale with huge mark-down of costs for stock clearance. Deborah Regulation from Expat Realtor shares her property market update, plus prime rental residences and houses at the moment available to lease Esparina EC @ Sengkang
  2. One of the biggest reasons investing in a Singapore new launch is an effective things is as a result of it is doable to be lent massive quantities of money at very low interest rates that you should utilize to purchase it. Then, if property values continue to go up, then you'll get a really high return on funding (ROI). Simply make sure you purchase one of the higher properties, reminiscent of the ones at Fernvale the Riverbank or any Singapore landed property Get Earnings by means of Renting

    In its statement, the singapore property listing - website link, government claimed that the majority citizens buying their first residence won't be hurt by the new measures. Some concessions can even be prolonged to chose teams of consumers, similar to married couples with a minimum of one Singaporean partner who are purchasing their second property so long as they intend to promote their first residential property. Lower the LTV limit on housing loans granted by monetary establishments regulated by MAS from 70% to 60% for property purchasers who are individuals with a number of outstanding housing loans on the time of the brand new housing purchase. Singapore Property Measures - 30 August 2010 The most popular seek for the number of bedrooms in Singapore is 4, followed by 2 and three. Lush Acres EC @ Sengkang

    Discover out more about real estate funding in the area, together with info on international funding incentives and property possession. Many Singaporeans have been investing in property across the causeway in recent years, attracted by comparatively low prices. However, those who need to exit their investments quickly are likely to face significant challenges when trying to sell their property – and could finally be stuck with a property they can't sell. Career improvement programmes, in-house valuation, auctions and administrative help, venture advertising and marketing, skilled talks and traisning are continuously planned for the sales associates to help them obtain better outcomes for his or her shoppers while at Knight Frank Singapore. No change Present Rules

    Extending the tax exemption would help. The exemption, which may be as a lot as $2 million per family, covers individuals who negotiate a principal reduction on their existing mortgage, sell their house short (i.e., for lower than the excellent loans), or take part in a foreclosure course of. An extension of theexemption would seem like a common-sense means to assist stabilize the housing market, but the political turmoil around the fiscal-cliff negotiations means widespread sense could not win out. Home Minority Chief Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) believes that the mortgage relief provision will be on the table during the grand-cut price talks, in response to communications director Nadeam Elshami. Buying or promoting of blue mild bulbs is unlawful.

    A vendor's stamp duty has been launched on industrial property for the primary time, at rates ranging from 5 per cent to 15 per cent. The Authorities might be trying to reassure the market that they aren't in opposition to foreigners and PRs investing in Singapore's property market. They imposed these measures because of extenuating components available in the market." The sale of new dual-key EC models will even be restricted to multi-generational households only. The models have two separate entrances, permitting grandparents, for example, to dwell separately. The vendor's stamp obligation takes effect right this moment and applies to industrial property and plots which might be offered inside three years of the date of buy. JLL named Best Performing Property Brand for second year running

    The data offered is for normal info purposes only and isn't supposed to be personalised investment or monetary advice. Motley Fool Singapore contributor Stanley Lim would not personal shares in any corporations talked about. Singapore private home costs increased by 1.eight% within the fourth quarter of 2012, up from 0.6% within the earlier quarter. Resale prices of government-built HDB residences which are usually bought by Singaporeans, elevated by 2.5%, quarter on quarter, the quickest acquire in five quarters. And industrial property, prices are actually double the levels of three years ago. No withholding tax in the event you sell your property. All your local information regarding vital HDB policies, condominium launches, land growth, commercial property and more

    There are various methods to go about discovering the precise property. Some local newspapers (together with the Straits Instances ) have categorised property sections and many local property brokers have websites. Now there are some specifics to consider when buying a 'new launch' rental. Intended use of the unit Every sale begins with 10 p.c low cost for finish of season sale; changes to 20 % discount storewide; follows by additional reduction of fiftyand ends with last discount of 70 % or extra. Typically there is even a warehouse sale or transferring out sale with huge mark-down of costs for stock clearance. Deborah Regulation from Expat Realtor shares her property market update, plus prime rental residences and houses at the moment available to lease Esparina EC @ Sengkang
  3. i.e., no contradicting information is known