The US Constitution Says What It Means

Say What You Mean!

The aspect I find most interesting about our technology is when we introduce it to people that are passionate about their writings. When we show someone the Knowledge View of a document they have created we are met with a mix of "yes, that is exactly what I was trying to say" or "no, that Knowledge Signature does not represent what is in my document". Yet, we at Cirilab believe that the document speaks for itself and that our algorithm does indeed reveal the theme structure within a document.

I'm from Missouri so prove it! Well, I'm not personally from Missouri but you get the idea!

So we decided to find a document that is really well written and recognized by all and then run it through our software so that we could demonstrate the accuracy of thematic extraction technology. And what better document than the US Constitution, a document that was reviewed and agreed upon by many before it was published. For Cirilab, the US Constitution is a great example of a document that was really well written and that represents the "themes" that embody the messages that it is trying to convey to the reader. When we look at the current makeup of the US, it's government, and the rights that the country stands for, especially given recent elections, we believe that the Knowledge Signature of the US Constitution reflects very clearly the important themes that the writers wanted to impress upon the reader of the document but more importantly the flavor of the country it was meant to direct.

In short, it is our view that the US Constitution is a very well written and well considered document that speaks very clearly of themes of a country that it is meant to guide during its continued development as well as the balance of power within government that was created to ensure the protection and freedom of its citizens. And I am sure that anyone reading this post will say "well of course it is!". Yes, but how can be demonstrate that it was well written and that it conveys the themes that it was meant to convey to the country's citizens? To prove our point we created several Knowledge View outputs of the US Constitution for all to review and consider. Your review of our Knowledge View of the US Constitution, as well as the Mindsystems generated MindManager mind maps will no doubt be the real test.

Standard Cirilab Knowledge View Output

http://demo.cirilab.com/projects/we_the_people/index.htm

US Constitution Republished based on it’s Thematic Knowledge Signature Outline by www.Mindsystems.com

http://demo.cirilab.com/projects/simpleoutline/index.html

Thematic Knowledge Signature Presentation within MindManager republished by www.Mindsystems.com

http://demo.cirilab.com/projects/presentation/index.html

Thematic Dynamic Outline Web Published View of Cirilab Output republished by www.Mindsystems.com

http://demo.cirilab.com/projects/dynamicoutline/index.html

I look forward to any comments you might have about our Knowledge View and Mindsystems mind maps of the US Constitution. In particular I ask you: "Is the Knowledge Signature a thematically accurate view of US Constitution?".

Comments

[theWanderingAuthor]

You do seem to be missing one point here. Your test doesn't prove the algorithm works for all documents. It proves it works for documents with the wording and structure of the Constitution. Something can be well written, yet have a different structure and style, and one your algorithm may or may not handle well. To say: our algorithm works well on one well-written document, therefore if it doesn't work well the document in question must not be well written is quite a logical leap. Until all writers can agree your algorithm analyses their work accurately, or you can demonstrate the exceptions are not well written, we have to assume your algorithm could be faulty.

[Arnold Villeneuve]

Hello WanderingAuthor

Thanks for your email. I don't think you will ever find "all authors" agreeing on anything including the meaning of a thing. As such, we try to focus on providing value through thematic extraction and knowledge generation. However, one thing you are absolutely correct about is that the author will always be the judge of what is valueable to him.

Having said that the document "is what it is and its terms and themes and structure" create a self expression that may or may not be in synch with what the author was thinking or trying to express within the creating brain. Thinking about a thing and writting about a thing are two different things.

Why don't we try this: you send me some documents and I'll process them with our software and post them so that you can make a judgement call and so that other authors can add their comments. You'll have a chance to better evaluate the technology and we will be able to learn from your suggestions and critique.

[lk123456]

"we decided to find a document that is really well written and recognized by all and then run it through our software so that we could demonstrate the accuracy of thematic extraction technology."
http://www.vcao.net