Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Proof-of-concept relation-centric architecture supports systematic generalization in artificial intelligence, enhancing cognitive tasks.
This dataset accompanies the paper “Human-like Artificial Intelligence: A Proof-of-Concept Relation-Centric Architecture for Systematic Generalization” presenting HAI (Human-like Artificial Intelligence) v2.0, a symbolic AI architecture grounded in cognitive science and knowledge representation principles. HAI employs relational decomposition — representing conceptual structures through factorization into constituent dimensions — and a grade ontology of 120+ relation types to support systematic generalization, compositional reasoning, and interpretable concept formation.The dataset consists of 16 files organized as follows:Databases (6 files): LD — Learning Data: 27 unique driving scenario cases encoded as 7-column numerical tuples (Object, Place, State, Location, Direction, Speed, Activity), used for observational learning and pattern discovery. OA — Object Attributes: attribute values (size, mass, shape, material) linked to objects in LD, used during observational learning. OF — Object Features: feature values as alternating quantity-feature pairs linked to objects in LD. NC — New Cases: 12 unique test cases (6 seen objects in unseen combinations, 6 entirely unseen), reserved for self-learning and testing. NA — New Attributes: attribute data linked to objects in NC. NF — New Features: feature data linked to objects in NC. Visualizations (9 PNG files): 1_concept_hierarchy — Directed graph of concepts organized by hierarchical level (4A, 4B, 4C, 1A, 2A), with nodes color-coded by level and edges derived from grade-5 hierarchy links. 2_category_hierarchy — Graph showing categories with their member concepts (solid edges) and raw object instances (dashed edges), color-coded by category. 3_grade_distribution — Two-panel chart showing (left) the number of links per grade type and (right) the average link strength per grade, across all 120+ grades in the ontology. 4_object_features — Graph of the top 15 objects (by feature count) and their associated feature concepts, with edge width proportional to feature quantity. 5_object_attributes — Graph of the same top 15 objects linked to their attribute concepts (size, mass, shape, material), color-coded by attribute type. 6_links_sample — Full network graph of all relational links, colored by grade type and with edge width proportional to link strength. 3d_all_links — 3D map of all links color-coded by grade group (Object-Raw, Attributes, Features, Hierarchy, Semantic, Frequency, Comparison, Cross-Domain, Analogy), plotted across the six databases (LD, NC, OA, NA, OF, NF) and four layers (LAYER1–LAYER4). 3d_ld_stacked — 3D stacked visualization of the LD database across all three index levels (ID_LEVEL, RAW_VALUES_LEVEL, SEMANTIC_LEVEL) and four layers, with links color-coded by grade group. 3d_concepts_by_level — 3D vertical stack of all 26 abstraction levels (4A through 11E), with concepts shown as circles and categories as squares arranged in a spiral pattern per level, and inter-level links color-coded by relation type. Interactive Export (1 HTML file):An HTML export of the full system state, providing browser-based tabular views of all concepts (GIC_*), categories (GICAT_*), relational links (GIL_*), and raw instances (RWGI_*), along with system statistics and grade distribution. No local installation is required to explore the data.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ionut Ceapa (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: