and say , uh  I don't know , it could be , like   This isn't the way it really is , but let me say  that , suppose someone mentioned , uh , admission fees Ah , it takes too long. Try  let me just say " Landmark ". If the thing is a landmark , you know ,  um  then there 's another thing that says if   um  if it 's closed or not , at the moment. Alright , so you have nodes. Right ? And the , uh , problem that we were having was that , you know , given N - nodes , there 's " two to the N " Given N - nodes , and furthermore , the fact that there 's three things here , we need to specify " three times " , uh , " two to the N " probabilities. Right ? That 's assuming these are all binary , which f they may not be. For example , they could be " time of day " , in which case we could , uh , say , you know , " Morning , afternoon , evening , night ". So , this could be more So , it 's a lot , anyway. And , that 's a lot of probabilities to put here , which is kind of a pain. So  Noisy - ORs are a way to , uh ,  sort of deal with this. Um Where should I put this ? So , the idea is that , um ,  Let 's call these , uh , C - one , C - two , C - three , and C - four , and E , for Cause and Effect , I guess. The idea is to have these intermediate nodes. Right. Well , actually , the idea , first of all , is that each of these things has a  quote - unquote distinguished state , which means that this is  the state in which we don't really know anything about it. So  right ? So , for example , if we don't really know  if the thing is a landmark or not , Or , i if that just doesn't seem relevant , then that would be th sort of the Disting - the Distinguish state. It 's a really , you know ,  if there is something for the person talking about the admission fee , you know , if they didn't talk about it , that would be the Distinguish state.

S so , this is a fanciful way of saying " default " ?


S so , this is a fanciful way of saying " default " ?

That 's just what they  the word they used in that paper.


That 's just what they  the word they used in that paper.


That 's just what they  the word they used in that paper.

So , the idea is that , um ,  you have these intermediate nodes , right ? E - one , E - two , E - three and E - four ?


That 's just what they  the word they used in that paper.

So , the idea is that , um ,  you have these intermediate nodes , right ? E - one , E - two , E - three and E - four ?

So , this is the Heckerman paper you 're working with ? Good.


So , the idea is that , um ,  you have these intermediate nodes , right ? E - one , E - two , E - three and E - four ?

So , this is the Heckerman paper you 're working with ? Good.

Yeah. So  The idea is that , each of these EI  is   represents what this would be  if all the other ones were in the distinguish state. Right ? So , for example , suppose that the person  I mean , suppose the thing that they talked about is a landmark. But none of the other   sort of cues really apply. Then ,  this would be  W The  this would just represent the probability distribution of this , assuming that this cue is turned on and the other ones just didn't apply ? So , you know , if it is a landmark , and no none of the other things really ap applicable , then  this would represent the probability distribution. So maybe in this case   Maybe we just t k Maybe we decide that , if the thing 's a landmark and we don't know anything else , then we 're gonna conclude that , um   They want to view it with probability , you know , point four. They want to enter it with probability , uh  with probability point five and they want to approach it probability point one , say  Right ? So we come up with these l little tables for each of those OK. And the final thing is that , um    this is a deterministic function of these , so we don't need to specify any probabilities. We just have to , um , say what function this is , right ? So we can let this be , um   G of E - one comma E - two. E - three , E - four. Right ? and our example G would be , um ,  a majority vote ? Right ?


So , the idea is that , um ,  you have these intermediate nodes , right ? E - one , E - two , E - three and E - four ?

So , this is the Heckerman paper you 're working with ? Good.

Yeah. So  The idea is that , each of these EI  is   represents what this would be  if all the other ones were in the distinguish state. Right ? So , for example , suppose that the person  I mean , suppose the thing that they talked about is a landmark. But none of the other   sort of cues really apply. Then ,  this would be  W The  this would just represent the probability distribution of this , assuming that this cue is turned on and the other ones just didn't apply ? So , you know , if it is a landmark , and no none of the other things really ap applicable , then  this would represent the probability distribution. So maybe in this case   Maybe we just t k Maybe we decide that , if the thing 's a landmark and we don't know anything else , then we 're gonna conclude that , um   They want to view it with probability , you know , point four. They want to enter it with probability , uh  with probability point five and they want to approach it probability point one , say  Right ? So we come up with these l little tables for each of those OK. And the final thing is that , um    this is a deterministic function of these , so we don't need to specify any probabilities. We just have to , um , say what function this is , right ? So we can let this be , um   G of E - one comma E - two. E - three , E - four. Right ? and our example G would be , um ,  a majority vote ? Right ?

Well. OK , so th so the important point  is  W not what the G function is. The important point is  that  Um  There is a  a  a general kind of idea of shortcutting the full CPT. Th - c the full conditional probability table  with some function. OK ? Which y w you choose appropriately for each case. So , depending on  what your situation is , there are different functions which are most appropriate. And  So I gave  eh  Bhaskara a copy of this , eh  sort of " ninety - two "  paper. D and you got one , Robert.


So , this is the Heckerman paper you 're working with ? Good.

Yeah. So  The idea is that , each of these EI  is   represents what this would be  if all the other ones were in the distinguish state. Right ? So , for example , suppose that the person  I mean , suppose the thing that they talked about is a landmark. But none of the other   sort of cues really apply. Then ,  this would be  W The  this would just represent the probability distribution of this , assuming that this cue is turned on and the other ones just didn't apply ? So , you know , if it is a landmark , and no none of the other things really ap applicable , then  this would represent the probability distribution. So maybe in this case   Maybe we just t k Maybe we decide that , if the thing 's a landmark and we don't know anything else , then we 're gonna conclude that , um   They want to view it with probability , you know , point four. They want to enter it with probability , uh  with probability point five and they want to approach it probability point one , say  Right ? So we come up with these l little tables for each of those OK. And the final thing is that , um    this is a deterministic function of these , so we don't need to specify any probabilities. We just have to , um , say what function this is , right ? So we can let this be , um   G of E - one comma E - two. E - three , E - four. Right ? and our example G would be , um ,  a majority vote ? Right ?

Well. OK , so th so the important point  is  W not what the G function is. The important point is  that  Um  There is a  a  a general kind of idea of shortcutting the full CPT. Th - c the full conditional probability table  with some function. OK ? Which y w you choose appropriately for each case. So , depending on  what your situation is , there are different functions which are most appropriate. And  So I gave  eh  Bhaskara a copy of this , eh  sort of " ninety - two "  paper. D and you got one , Robert.


Yeah. So  The idea is that , each of these EI  is   represents what this would be  if all the other ones were in the distinguish state. Right ? So , for example , suppose that the person  I mean , suppose the thing that they talked about is a landmark. But none of the other   sort of cues really apply. Then ,  this would be  W The  this would just represent the probability distribution of this , assuming that this cue is turned on and the other ones just didn't apply ? So , you know , if it is a landmark , and no none of the other things really ap applicable , then  this would represent the probability distribution. So maybe in this case   Maybe we just t k Maybe we decide that , if the thing 's a landmark and we don't know anything else , then we 're gonna conclude that , um   They want to view it with probability , you know , point four. They want to enter it with probability , uh  with probability point five and they want to approach it probability point one , say  Right ? So we come up with these l little tables for each of those OK. And the final thing is that , um    this is a deterministic function of these , so we don't need to specify any probabilities. We just have to , um , say what function this is , right ? So we can let this be , um   G of E - one comma E - two. E - three , E - four. Right ? and our example G would be , um ,  a majority vote ? Right ?

Well. OK , so th so the important point  is  W not what the G function is. The important point is  that  Um  There is a  a  a general kind of idea of shortcutting the full CPT. Th - c the full conditional probability table  with some function. OK ? Which y w you choose appropriately for each case. So , depending on  what your situation is , there are different functions which are most appropriate. And  So I gave  eh  Bhaskara a copy of this , eh  sort of " ninety - two "  paper. D and you got one , Robert.


Well. OK , so th so the important point  is  W not what the G function is. The important point is  that  Um  There is a  a  a general kind of idea of shortcutting the full CPT. Th - c the full conditional probability table  with some function. OK ? Which y w you choose appropriately for each case. So , depending on  what your situation is , there are different functions which are most appropriate. And  So I gave  eh  Bhaskara a copy of this , eh  sort of " ninety - two "  paper. D and you got one , Robert.

There 's  I mean  yeah. it 's Heckerman and Breese.


There 's  I mean  yeah. it 's Heckerman and Breese.


There 's  I mean  yeah. it 's Heckerman and Breese.

So , I u w Um , yo uh  you  Have you read it yet ?


So , I u w Um , yo uh  you  Have you read it yet ?

Uh , you can  Yeah , you should take a look at it , I guess.


So , I u w Um , yo uh  you  Have you read it yet ?

Uh , you can  Yeah , you should take a look at it , I guess.

OK , so you should take a look. Nancy , I 'm sure you read it at some point in life.


Uh , you can  Yeah , you should take a look at it , I guess.

OK , so you should take a look. Nancy , I 'm sure you read it at some point in life.


OK , so you should take a look. Nancy , I 'm sure you read it at some point in life.

OK. And  so , you other guys can decide how interested


OK. And  so , you other guys can decide how interested

Anyway. So the paper isn't th isn't real hard.


Anyway. So the paper isn't th isn't real hard.

And   Uh  One of the questions just come at Bhaskara is , " How much of this does JavaBayes support ? "


Anyway. So the paper isn't th isn't real hard.

And   Uh  One of the questions just come at Bhaskara is , " How much of this does JavaBayes support ? "

Yeah , it 's a good question. Um    The  so what we want , is basically JavaBayes to support deterministic , uh , functions.


And   Uh  One of the questions just come at Bhaskara is , " How much of this does JavaBayes support ? "

Yeah , it 's a good question. Um    The  so what we want , is basically JavaBayes to support deterministic , uh , functions.


And   Uh  One of the questions just come at Bhaskara is , " How much of this does JavaBayes support ? "

Yeah , it 's a good question. Um    The  so what we want , is basically JavaBayes to support deterministic , uh , functions.

And , um   In a sense it sup we can make it supported by , um ,  manually , uh , entering , you know , probabilities that are one and zeros , right ?


Yeah , it 's a good question. Um    The  so what we want , is basically JavaBayes to support deterministic , uh , functions.

And , um   In a sense it sup we can make it supported by , um ,  manually , uh , entering , you know , probabilities that are one and zeros , right ?

Right. So the little handout that  The little thing that I sent  I sent a message saying , uh , here is a way to take  One thing you could do , which is kind of s in a way , stupid , is take this deterministic function , and use it to build the CPT. So , if Ba - JavaBayes won't do it for you ,


And , um   In a sense it sup we can make it supported by , um ,  manually , uh , entering , you know , probabilities that are one and zeros , right ?

Right. So the little handout that  The little thing that I sent  I sent a message saying , uh , here is a way to take  One thing you could do , which is kind of s in a way , stupid , is take this deterministic function , and use it to build the CPT. So , if Ba - JavaBayes won't do it for you ,


And , um   In a sense it sup we can make it supported by , um ,  manually , uh , entering , you know , probabilities that are one and zeros , right ?

Right. So the little handout that  The little thing that I sent  I sent a message saying , uh , here is a way to take  One thing you could do , which is kind of s in a way , stupid , is take this deterministic function , and use it to build the CPT. So , if Ba - JavaBayes won't do it for you ,

that you can convert all that into what the CPT would be. Um  and , what I sent out about a week ago , was an idea of how to do that , for , um , evidence combination. So one of  one function that you could use as your " G function " is an e e Evidence - Combining. So you just take  the  uh , if each of th if each of the ones has its own little table like that ,  then you could take the , uh , strength of each of those , times its little table , and you 'd add up the total evidence for " V " , " E " , and " A ".


Right. So the little handout that  The little thing that I sent  I sent a message saying , uh , here is a way to take  One thing you could do , which is kind of s in a way , stupid , is take this deterministic function , and use it to build the CPT. So , if Ba - JavaBayes won't do it for you ,

that you can convert all that into what the CPT would be. Um  and , what I sent out about a week ago , was an idea of how to do that , for , um , evidence combination. So one of  one function that you could use as your " G function " is an e e Evidence - Combining. So you just take  the  uh , if each of th if each of the ones has its own little table like that ,  then you could take the , uh , strength of each of those , times its little table , and you 'd add up the total evidence for " V " , " E " , and " A ".

Mmm. I don't think you can do this , because   G is a function from  that  to that.


that you can convert all that into what the CPT would be. Um  and , what I sent out about a week ago , was an idea of how to do that , for , um , evidence combination. So one of  one function that you could use as your " G function " is an e e Evidence - Combining. So you just take  the  uh , if each of th if each of the ones has its own little table like that ,  then you could take the , uh , strength of each of those , times its little table , and you 'd add up the total evidence for " V " , " E " , and " A ".

Mmm. I don't think you can do this , because   G is a function from  that  to that.


Mmm. I don't think you can do this , because   G is a function from  that  to that.

Right ? So there 's no numbers. There 's just  quadruplets of  well , N - duplets of , uh , E Vs.


Right ? So there 's no numbers. There 's just  quadruplets of  well , N - duplets of , uh , E Vs.

I i i No , no  But I 'm saying is  There    There is a w I mean , if y if  if you decide what 's  what is appropriate , is probablistic evidence combination , you can write a function that does it. It 's a pui it 's actually one of the examples he 's got in there. But , anyway , s skipping  skipping the question of exactly which functions  now is it clear that you might like to be able to shortcut the whole conditional probability table.


Right ? So there 's no numbers. There 's just  quadruplets of  well , N - duplets of , uh , E Vs.

I i i No , no  But I 'm saying is  There    There is a w I mean , if y if  if you decide what 's  what is appropriate , is probablistic evidence combination , you can write a function that does it. It 's a pui it 's actually one of the examples he 's got in there. But , anyway , s skipping  skipping the question of exactly which functions  now is it clear that you might like to be able to shortcut the whole conditional probability table.

I mean , in some  it seems very plausible in some sense , where we will be likely to not be  observe some of the stuff. Cuz we don't have the a access to the information.


I i i No , no  But I 'm saying is  There    There is a w I mean , if y if  if you decide what 's  what is appropriate , is probablistic evidence combination , you can write a function that does it. It 's a pui it 's actually one of the examples he 's got in there. But , anyway , s skipping  skipping the question of exactly which functions  now is it clear that you might like to be able to shortcut the whole conditional probability table.

I mean , in some  it seems very plausible in some sense , where we will be likely to not be  observe some of the stuff. Cuz we don't have the a access to the information.

Right. That 's one of the problems , is , W Is  is , Where would th Where would it all come from ?


I mean , in some  it seems very plausible in some sense , where we will be likely to not be  observe some of the stuff. Cuz we don't have the a access to the information.

Right. That 's one of the problems , is , W Is  is , Where would th Where would it all come from ?


Right. That 's one of the problems , is , W Is  is , Where would th Where would it all come from ?

Is  Oh , right. W would not be ab able to observe


Is  Oh , right. W would not be ab able to observe


Is  Oh , right. W would not be ab able to observe

I if it 's a  a  a discar Discourse Initial Phrase , we will have nothing in the discourse history. So , if  if we ever want to wonder what was mention


I if it 's a  a  a discar Discourse Initial Phrase , we will have nothing in the discourse history. So , if  if we ever want to wonder what was mention

Oh  Oh. A are you saying that we 'll not be able to observe certain nodes ? That 's fine. That is sort of orthogonal thing.


I if it 's a  a  a discar Discourse Initial Phrase , we will have nothing in the discourse history. So , if  if we ever want to wonder what was mention

Oh  Oh. A are you saying that we 'll not be able to observe certain nodes ? That 's fine. That is sort of orthogonal thing.

Yeah , so there 's  there 's two separate things , Robert. The f the  the  the Bayes - nets in general are quite good at saying , " if you have no current information about this variable just take the prior for that. " OK ? Th - that 's what they 're real good at. So , if you don't have any information about the discourse , you just use your priors of  of whatever  eh the  discourse  uh , eh , basically whatever w it 's  Probabilistically , whatever it would be. And it 's  it 's sort of not a great estimate ,


Oh  Oh. A are you saying that we 'll not be able to observe certain nodes ? That 's fine. That is sort of orthogonal thing.

Yeah , so there 's  there 's two separate things , Robert. The f the  the  the Bayes - nets in general are quite good at saying , " if you have no current information about this variable just take the prior for that. " OK ? Th - that 's what they 're real good at. So , if you don't have any information about the discourse , you just use your priors of  of whatever  eh the  discourse  uh , eh , basically whatever w it 's  Probabilistically , whatever it would be. And it 's  it 's sort of not a great estimate ,

but  it 's the best one you have , and , so forth. So that , they 're good at. But the other problem is , how do you fill in all these numbers ? And I think that 's the one he was getting at.


Yeah , so there 's  there 's two separate things , Robert. The f the  the  the Bayes - nets in general are quite good at saying , " if you have no current information about this variable just take the prior for that. " OK ? Th - that 's what they 're real good at. So , if you don't have any information about the discourse , you just use your priors of  of whatever  eh the  discourse  uh , eh , basically whatever w it 's  Probabilistically , whatever it would be. And it 's  it 's sort of not a great estimate ,

but  it 's the best one you have , and , so forth. So that , they 're good at. But the other problem is , how do you fill in all these numbers ? And I think that 's the one he was getting at.


but  it 's the best one you have , and , so forth. So that , they 're good at. But the other problem is , how do you fill in all these numbers ? And I think that 's the one he was getting at.

Yeah. So , specifically in this case you have to  f have this many numbers ,


Yeah. So , specifically in this case you have to  f have this many numbers ,

whereas in this case you just have to have three for this , three for this , three for this. Right ?


whereas in this case you just have to have three for this , three for this , three for this. Right ?

So you have to have just three N ? So , this is much smaller than that.


So you have to have just three N ? So , this is much smaller than that.


So , you don't need da data enough to cover  uh , nearly as much stuff.


So , you don't need da data enough to cover  uh , nearly as much stuff.

So , really , i What a  A Noisy - OR seems to kind of  " neural - net - acize " these Bayes - nets ?


So , you don't need da data enough to cover  uh , nearly as much stuff.

So , really , i What a  A Noisy - OR seems to kind of  " neural - net - acize " these Bayes - nets ?

Eh  well to some No , no. So , " Noisy - OR " is a funny way of referring to this , because  the Noisy - OR is only one instance.


So , really , i What a  A Noisy - OR seems to kind of  " neural - net - acize " these Bayes - nets ?

Eh  well to some No , no. So , " Noisy - OR " is a funny way of referring to this , because  the Noisy - OR is only one instance.


So , really , i What a  A Noisy - OR seems to kind of  " neural - net - acize " these Bayes - nets ?

Eh  well to some No , no. So , " Noisy - OR " is a funny way of referring to this , because  the Noisy - OR is only one instance.

That one actually isn't a Noisy - OR. So we 'll have to think of  of a way t t


Eh  well to some No , no. So , " Noisy - OR " is a funny way of referring to this , because  the Noisy - OR is only one instance.

That one actually isn't a Noisy - OR. So we 'll have to think of  of a way t t


That one actually isn't a Noisy - OR. So we 'll have to think of  of a way t t

it 's a Noisy - arg - max or a Noisy - whatever.


it 's a Noisy - arg - max or a Noisy - whatever.

Well , my point was more that we just  eh  With the neural net , right , eh , things come in , you have a function that combines them and


it 's a Noisy - arg - max or a Noisy - whatever.

Well , my point was more that we just  eh  With the neural net , right , eh , things come in , you have a function that combines them and

Yeah , it  it  Tha - that 's true. It is a is also more neural - net - like , although   Uh , it isn't necessarily sum  uh , s you know , sum of weights or anything like that.


Well , my point was more that we just  eh  With the neural net , right , eh , things come in , you have a function that combines them and

Yeah , it  it  Tha - that 's true. It is a is also more neural - net - like , although   Uh , it isn't necessarily sum  uh , s you know , sum of weights or anything like that.


Well , my point was more that we just  eh  With the neural net , right , eh , things come in , you have a function that combines them and

Yeah , it  it  Tha - that 's true. It is a is also more neural - net - like , although   Uh , it isn't necessarily sum  uh , s you know , sum of weights or anything like that.

I mean i You could have , uh , like the Noisy - OR function , really is one that 's essentially says , uh , take the max.


Yeah , it  it  Tha - that 's true. It is a is also more neural - net - like , although   Uh , it isn't necessarily sum  uh , s you know , sum of weights or anything like that.

I mean i You could have , uh , like the Noisy - OR function , really is one that 's essentially says , uh , take the max.


I mean i You could have , uh , like the Noisy - OR function , really is one that 's essentially says , uh , take the max.


Uh But anyway. So  And , I thi I think that 's the standard way people get around the  uh There are a couple other ones. There are ways of breaking this up into s to  to subnets and stuff like that. But , um The I think we definitely  I think it 's a great idea tha to  to pursue that.


Uh But anyway. So  And , I thi I think that 's the standard way people get around the  uh There are a couple other ones. There are ways of breaking this up into s to  to subnets and stuff like that. But , um The I think we definitely  I think it 's a great idea tha to  to pursue that.

Wha - still sort of leaves one question. It  I mean you  you can always uh  see easily that  that I 'm not grasping everything correctly , but  what seemed attractive to me in im uh in the last discussion we had , was  that we find out a means of  of getting these point four , point five , point one , of C - four , not because , you know , A is a Landmark or not , but we  we  we label this whatever object type , and if it 's a garden , it 's point three , point four , point two. If it 's a castle , it 's point eight , point one , point one. If it 's ,  uh , a town hall , it 's point two , point three , point five.


Wha - still sort of leaves one question. It  I mean you  you can always uh  see easily that  that I 'm not grasping everything correctly , but  what seemed attractive to me in im uh in the last discussion we had , was  that we find out a means of  of getting these point four , point five , point one , of C - four , not because , you know , A is a Landmark or not , but we  we  we label this whatever object type , and if it 's a garden , it 's point three , point four , point two. If it 's a castle , it 's point eight , point one , point one. If it 's ,  uh , a town hall , it 's point two , point three , point five.

And so forth. And we don't want to write this down  necessarily every time for something but , uh  let 's see.


Wha - still sort of leaves one question. It  I mean you  you can always uh  see easily that  that I 'm not grasping everything correctly , but  what seemed attractive to me in im uh in the last discussion we had , was  that we find out a means of  of getting these point four , point five , point one , of C - four , not because , you know , A is a Landmark or not , but we  we  we label this whatever object type , and if it 's a garden , it 's point three , point four , point two. If it 's a castle , it 's point eight , point one , point one. If it 's ,  uh , a town hall , it 's point two , point three , point five.

And so forth. And we don't want to write this down  necessarily every time for something but , uh  let 's see.

It 'll be students  Where else would it be stored ? That 's the question.


And so forth. And we don't want to write this down  necessarily every time for something but , uh  let 's see.

It 'll be students  Where else would it be stored ? That 's the question.

Well , in the beginning , we 'll write up a flat file.


It 'll be students  Where else would it be stored ? That 's the question.

Well , in the beginning , we 'll write up a flat file.


Well , in the beginning , we 'll write up a flat file.


and we 'll write it down in a flat file.


and we 'll write it down in a flat file.

No. So , i is Well , let me say something , guys , cuz there 's not  There 's a pretty point about this we might as well get in right now. Which is  The hierarchy that s comes with the ontology is just what you want for this.


and we 'll write it down in a flat file.

No. So , i is Well , let me say something , guys , cuz there 's not  There 's a pretty point about this we might as well get in right now. Which is  The hierarchy that s comes with the ontology is just what you want for this.

So that   Uh , if you know about it  let 's say , a particular town hall   that , it 's one that is a monument ,  then , that would be stored there. If you don't , you look up the hierarchy , Eh  so , you  you  you may or  So , then you 'd have this little vector of , um , you know , Approach Mode or EVA Mode. Let 's  OK , so we have  the EVA vector for  for various kinds of landmarks. If you know it for a specific landmark you put it there. If you don't , you just go up the hierarchy to the first place you find one.


No. So , i is Well , let me say something , guys , cuz there 's not  There 's a pretty point about this we might as well get in right now. Which is  The hierarchy that s comes with the ontology is just what you want for this.

So that   Uh , if you know about it  let 's say , a particular town hall   that , it 's one that is a monument ,  then , that would be stored there. If you don't , you look up the hierarchy , Eh  so , you  you  you may or  So , then you 'd have this little vector of , um , you know , Approach Mode or EVA Mode. Let 's  OK , so we have  the EVA vector for  for various kinds of landmarks. If you know it for a specific landmark you put it there. If you don't , you just go up the hierarchy to the first place you find one.

OK. So , is the idea to put it in the ontology ?


So that   Uh , if you know about it  let 's say , a particular town hall   that , it 's one that is a monument ,  then , that would be stored there. If you don't , you look up the hierarchy , Eh  so , you  you  you may or  So , then you 'd have this little vector of , um , you know , Approach Mode or EVA Mode. Let 's  OK , so we have  the EVA vector for  for various kinds of landmarks. If you know it for a specific landmark you put it there. If you don't , you just go up the hierarchy to the first place you find one.

OK. So , is the idea to put it in the ontology ?


OK. So , is the idea to put it in the ontology ?

Uh , or , link to  or  but  but in any case  i View it logically as being in the ontology. It 's part of what you know about  a  an object ,  is its EVA vector.


Uh , or , link to  or  but  but in any case  i View it logically as being in the ontology. It 's part of what you know about  a  an object ,  is its EVA vector.


Uh , or , link to  or  but  but in any case  i View it logically as being in the ontology. It 's part of what you know about  a  an object ,  is its EVA vector.

And , if yo As I say , if you know about a specific object , you put it there.


And , if yo As I say , if you know about a specific object , you put it there.

This is part of what Dekai was doing. So , when we get to Wu , The - e We 'll see w what he says about that.


This is part of what Dekai was doing. So , when we get to Wu , The - e We 'll see w what he says about that.

And , then if you  If it isn't there , it 's higher , and if you don't know anything except that it 's a b it 's  it 's a  building , then up at the highest thing , you have the pr what amounts to a prior. If you don't know anything else about a building ,  uh , you just take whatever your crude approximation is up at that level ,


And , then if you  If it isn't there , it 's higher , and if you don't know anything except that it 's a b it 's  it 's a  building , then up at the highest thing , you have the pr what amounts to a prior. If you don't know anything else about a building ,  uh , you just take whatever your crude approximation is up at that level ,

which might be equal , or whatever it is.


which might be equal , or whatever it is.

So , that 's a very pretty relationship between these local vectors and the ontology. And it seems to me the obvious thing to do , unless  we find a reason to do something different.


So , that 's a very pretty relationship between these local vectors and the ontology. And it seems to me the obvious thing to do , unless  we find a reason to do something different.


Yeah. So , we are  but we  we 're not doing the ontology , so we have to get to whoever is doing the  u ultimately ,


Yeah. So , we are  but we  we 're not doing the ontology , so we have to get to whoever is doing the  u ultimately ,

Indeed. So , that 's another thing we 're gonna need to do , is  is , to , either


Yeah. So , we are  but we  we 're not doing the ontology , so we have to get to whoever is doing the  u ultimately ,

Indeed. So , that 's another thing we 're gonna need to do , is  is , to , either

We 're gonna need some way to either get a p tag in the ontology , or add fields , or     some way to associate  Or , w It may be that all we can do is , um , some of our own hash tables that it  Th - the  th you know , there 's always a way to do that. It 's a just a question of


Indeed. So , that 's another thing we 're gonna need to do , is  is , to , either

We 're gonna need some way to either get a p tag in the ontology , or add fields , or     some way to associate  Or , w It may be that all we can do is , um , some of our own hash tables that it  Th - the  th you know , there 's always a way to do that. It 's a just a question of

Yeah , hash on object name to , you know , uh , the probabilities or whatever.


We 're gonna need some way to either get a p tag in the ontology , or add fields , or     some way to associate  Or , w It may be that all we can do is , um , some of our own hash tables that it  Th - the  th you know , there 's always a way to do that. It 's a just a question of

Yeah , hash on object name to , you know , uh , the probabilities or whatever.


We 're gonna need some way to either get a p tag in the ontology , or add fields , or     some way to associate  Or , w It may be that all we can do is , um , some of our own hash tables that it  Th - the  th you know , there 's always a way to do that. It 's a just a question of

Yeah , hash on object name to , you know , uh , the probabilities or whatever.

But it 's , uh   Well , it strikes me as a What For If we get the mechanism , that will be sort of the wonderful part. And then ,  how to make it work is  is the second part , in the sense that  I mean , m the guy who was doing the ontology  eh , eh , s ap apologized that i it will take him another through  two to three days because they 're having really trouble getting the upper level straight , and right now. The reason is ,  given the craw bet uh , the  the  the projects that all carry their own taxonomy and , on all history ,  they 're really trying to build one top level ontology ft that covers all the EML projects , and that 's , uh , uh , sort of a tough cookie , a little bit tougher than they  figured. I could have told them s so.


Yeah , hash on object name to , you know , uh , the probabilities or whatever.

But it 's , uh   Well , it strikes me as a What For If we get the mechanism , that will be sort of the wonderful part. And then ,  how to make it work is  is the second part , in the sense that  I mean , m the guy who was doing the ontology  eh , eh , s ap apologized that i it will take him another through  two to three days because they 're having really trouble getting the upper level straight , and right now. The reason is ,  given the craw bet uh , the  the  the projects that all carry their own taxonomy and , on all history ,  they 're really trying to build one top level ontology ft that covers all the EML projects , and that 's , uh , uh , sort of a tough cookie , a little bit tougher than they  figured. I could have told them s so.


But it 's , uh   Well , it strikes me as a What For If we get the mechanism , that will be sort of the wonderful part. And then ,  how to make it work is  is the second part , in the sense that  I mean , m the guy who was doing the ontology  eh , eh , s ap apologized that i it will take him another through  two to three days because they 're having really trouble getting the upper level straight , and right now. The reason is ,  given the craw bet uh , the  the  the projects that all carry their own taxonomy and , on all history ,  they 're really trying to build one top level ontology ft that covers all the EML projects , and that 's , uh , uh , sort of a tough cookie , a little bit tougher than they  figured. I could have told them s so.

Uh. But , nevertheless , it 's going to be there by n by , uh , next Monday and I will show you what 's  what some examples  from that for towers , and stuff. And , um , what I don't think is ever going to be in the ontology , is sort of , you know , the likelihood of , eh , people entering r town halls , and looking at town halls , and approaching town halls , especially since we are b dealing with a case - based , not an instance - based ontology. So , there will be nothing on  on that town hall , or on the Berkeley town hall , or on the  Heidelberg town hall , it 'll just be information on town halls.


But it 's , uh   Well , it strikes me as a What For If we get the mechanism , that will be sort of the wonderful part. And then ,  how to make it work is  is the second part , in the sense that  I mean , m the guy who was doing the ontology  eh , eh , s ap apologized that i it will take him another through  two to three days because they 're having really trouble getting the upper level straight , and right now. The reason is ,  given the craw bet uh , the  the  the projects that all carry their own taxonomy and , on all history ,  they 're really trying to build one top level ontology ft that covers all the EML projects , and that 's , uh , uh , sort of a tough cookie , a little bit tougher than they  figured. I could have told them s so.

Uh. But , nevertheless , it 's going to be there by n by , uh , next Monday and I will show you what 's  what some examples  from that for towers , and stuff. And , um , what I don't think is ever going to be in the ontology , is sort of , you know , the likelihood of , eh , people entering r town halls , and looking at town halls , and approaching town halls , especially since we are b dealing with a case - based , not an instance - based ontology. So , there will be nothing on  on that town hall , or on the Berkeley town hall , or on the  Heidelberg town hall , it 'll just be information on town halls.

Well , they  they  they  How ar What are they gonna do with instances ?


Uh. But , nevertheless , it 's going to be there by n by , uh , next Monday and I will show you what 's  what some examples  from that for towers , and stuff. And , um , what I don't think is ever going to be in the ontology , is sort of , you know , the likelihood of , eh , people entering r town halls , and looking at town halls , and approaching town halls , especially since we are b dealing with a case - based , not an instance - based ontology. So , there will be nothing on  on that town hall , or on the Berkeley town hall , or on the  Heidelberg town hall , it 'll just be information on town halls.

Well , they  they  they  How ar What are they gonna do with instances ?


Well , they  they  they  How ar What are they gonna do with instances ?

Well , that 's  Hhh. That 's  that 's al different question. I mean , th the  first , they had to make a design question ,  " do we take ontologies that have instances ? or just one that does not , that just has the types ? "


Well , that 's  Hhh. That 's  that 's al different question. I mean , th the  first , they had to make a design question ,  " do we take ontologies that have instances ? or just one that does not , that just has the types ? "


Well , that 's  Hhh. That 's  that 's al different question. I mean , th the  first , they had to make a design question ,  " do we take ontologies that have instances ? or just one that does not , that just has the types ? "

And , so , since the d decision was on types , on a d simply type - based ,  we now have to hook it up to instances. I mean this is


Well , that 's  Hhh. That 's  that 's al different question. I mean , th the  first , they had to make a design question ,  " do we take ontologies that have instances ? or just one that does not , that just has the types ? "

And , so , since the d decision was on types , on a d simply type - based ,  we now have to hook it up to instances. I mean this is

But what i What is SmartKom gonna do about that ?


And , so , since the d decision was on types , on a d simply type - based ,  we now have to hook it up to instances. I mean this is

But what i What is SmartKom gonna do about that ?


But what i What is SmartKom gonna do about that ?

Yeah , but the ontology is really not a SmartKom thing , in  in and of itself. That 's more something that  I kicked loose in  in EML. So it 's a completely EML thing.


Yeah , but the ontology is really not a SmartKom thing , in  in and of itself. That 's more something that  I kicked loose in  in EML. So it 's a completely EML thing.

But  Uh  uh  SmartKom 's gonna need an ontology.


Yeah , but the ontology is really not a SmartKom thing , in  in and of itself. That 's more something that  I kicked loose in  in EML. So it 's a completely EML thing.

But  Uh  uh  SmartKom 's gonna need an ontology.

Yes , u a w a lot of people are aware of that.


Yeah , but the ontology is really not a SmartKom thing , in  in and of itself. That 's more something that  I kicked loose in  in EML. So it 's a completely EML thing.

But  Uh  uh  SmartKom 's gonna need an ontology.

Yes , u a w a lot of people are aware of that.

I understand ,  but is anybody doing anything about it ?


But  Uh  uh  SmartKom 's gonna need an ontology.

Yes , u a w a lot of people are aware of that.

I understand ,  but is anybody doing anything about it ?


Yes , u a w a lot of people are aware of that.

I understand ,  but is anybody doing anything about it ?

OK. It 's a political problem. We won't worry about it.


I understand ,  but is anybody doing anything about it ?

OK. It 's a political problem. We won't worry about it.

No , but  th the r eh  I th I still think that there is enough information in there. For example , whether  OK. So , th it will know about the twenty object types there are in the world. Let 's assume there are only twenty object types in this world. And it will know if any of those have institutional meanings. So , in a sense , " I " used as Institutions for some s in some sense or the other. Which makes them  enterable. Right ? In a sense.


OK. It 's a political problem. We won't worry about it.

No , but  th the r eh  I th I still think that there is enough information in there. For example , whether  OK. So , th it will know about the twenty object types there are in the world. Let 's assume there are only twenty object types in this world. And it will know if any of those have institutional meanings. So , in a sense , " I " used as Institutions for some s in some sense or the other. Which makes them  enterable. Right ? In a sense.


No , but  th the r eh  I th I still think that there is enough information in there. For example , whether  OK. So , th it will know about the twenty object types there are in the world. Let 's assume there are only twenty object types in this world. And it will know if any of those have institutional meanings. So , in a sense , " I " used as Institutions for some s in some sense or the other. Which makes them  enterable. Right ? In a sense.


Conceptually , we know what should be done. When we see what people have done , it may turn out that the easiest thing to do  is to build a  a separate thing that  that just pools i i Like , i i it  it may be , that , the  the instance  w That we have to build our own instance , uh , things , that , with their types ,


Conceptually , we know what should be done. When we see what people have done , it may turn out that the easiest thing to do  is to build a  a separate thing that  that just pools i i Like , i i it  it may be , that , the  the instance  w That we have to build our own instance , uh , things , that , with their types ,

Yeah , it 's  Right , we can just assume


Conceptually , we know what should be done. When we see what people have done , it may turn out that the easiest thing to do  is to build a  a separate thing that  that just pools i i Like , i i it  it may be , that , the  the instance  w That we have to build our own instance , uh , things , that , with their types ,

Yeah , it 's  Right , we can just assume

and then it goes off to the ontology once you have its type. So we build a little data structure And so what we would do in that case , is , in our instance gadget have  our E V And if we d there isn't one we 'd get the type and then have the E V As for the type. So we 'd have our own little ,  uh , EVA tree. And then , for other , uh , vectors that we need.


Yeah , it 's  Right , we can just assume

and then it goes off to the ontology once you have its type. So we build a little data structure And so what we would do in that case , is , in our instance gadget have  our E V And if we d there isn't one we 'd get the type and then have the E V As for the type. So we 'd have our own little ,  uh , EVA tree. And then , for other , uh , vectors that we need.

So , we 'd have our own little  things so that whenever we needed one , we 'd just use the ontology to get the type ,


and then it goes off to the ontology once you have its type. So we build a little data structure And so what we would do in that case , is , in our instance gadget have  our E V And if we d there isn't one we 'd get the type and then have the E V As for the type. So we 'd have our own little ,  uh , EVA tree. And then , for other , uh , vectors that we need.

So , we 'd have our own little  things so that whenever we needed one , we 'd just use the ontology to get the type ,


So , we 'd have our own little  things so that whenever we needed one , we 'd just use the ontology to get the type ,

and then would hash or whatever we do to say , " ah !


and then would hash or whatever we do to say , " ah !

If it 's that type of thing , and we want its EVA vector , pppt - pppt !  it 's that. " So , I I think we can handle that. And then  But , the combination functions , and whether we can put those in Java Bayes , and all that sort of stuff , is , uh  is the bigger deal.


If it 's that type of thing , and we want its EVA vector , pppt - pppt !  it 's that. " So , I I think we can handle that. And then  But , the combination functions , and whether we can put those in Java Bayes , and all that sort of stuff , is , uh  is the bigger deal.

I think that 's where we have to get technically clever.


If it 's that type of thing , and we want its EVA vector , pppt - pppt !  it 's that. " So , I I think we can handle that. And then  But , the combination functions , and whether we can put those in Java Bayes , and all that sort of stuff , is , uh  is the bigger deal.

I think that 's where we have to get technically clever.

We could just steal the classes in JavaBayes and then interface to them with our own code.


I think that 's where we have to get technically clever.

We could just steal the classes in JavaBayes and then interface to them with our own code.


We could just steal the classes in JavaBayes and then interface to them with our own code.

That requires understanding the classes in JavaBayes , I guess. @ @.


That requires understanding the classes in JavaBayes , I guess. @ @.

Yeah , I mean , it 's , uh , e e e e e cute. I mean , you 've been around enough to  I mean  Just ?


That requires understanding the classes in JavaBayes , I guess. @ @.

Yeah , I mean , it 's , uh , e e e e e cute. I mean , you 've been around enough to  I mean  Just ?

I mean , there 's this huge package which  which may or may not be consistent and  you know. But , yeah , we could look at it.


Yeah , I mean , it 's , uh , e e e e e cute. I mean , you 've been around enough to  I mean  Just ?

I mean , there 's this huge package which  which may or may not be consistent and  you know. But , yeah , we could look at it.


I mean , there 's this huge package which  which may or may not be consistent and  you know. But , yeah , we could look at it.

Yeah. It 's b It  It 's an inter sort of a kind of a  it  The thing is , it 's kind of an interpreter and i i it expects its data structures to be in a given form , and if you say , " hey , we 're gonna  make a different kind of data structure to stick in there  "


I mean , there 's this huge package which  which may or may not be consistent and  you know. But , yeah , we could look at it.

Yeah. It 's b It  It 's an inter sort of a kind of a  it  The thing is , it 's kind of an interpreter and i i it expects its data structures to be in a given form , and if you say , " hey , we 're gonna  make a different kind of data structure to stick in there  "

Well , no , but that just means there 's a protocol , right ? That you could


Yeah. It 's b It  It 's an inter sort of a kind of a  it  The thing is , it 's kind of an interpreter and i i it expects its data structures to be in a given form , and if you say , " hey , we 're gonna  make a different kind of data structure to stick in there  "

Well , no , but that just means there 's a protocol , right ? That you could

It may or may not. I don't know. That 's the question is " to what extent does it allow us to put in these G functions ? " And I don't know.


Yeah. It 's b It  It 's an inter sort of a kind of a  it  The thing is , it 's kind of an interpreter and i i it expects its data structures to be in a given form , and if you say , " hey , we 're gonna  make a different kind of data structure to stick in there  "

Well , no , but that just means there 's a protocol , right ? That you could

It may or may not. I don't know. That 's the question is " to what extent does it allow us to put in these G functions ? " And I don't know.

Well , no , but  I mean  What I uh the  So you could have four different Bayes - nets that you 're running , and then run your own  write your own function that would take the output of those four , and make your own " G function " , is what I was saying.


Well , no , but that just means there 's a protocol , right ? That you could

It may or may not. I don't know. That 's the question is " to what extent does it allow us to put in these G functions ? " And I don't know.

Well , no , but  I mean  What I uh the  So you could have four different Bayes - nets that you 're running , and then run your own  write your own function that would take the output of those four , and make your own " G function " , is what I was saying.

Yeah , that 's fine if it 's  if it comes only at the end. But suppose you want it embedded ?


It may or may not. I don't know. That 's the question is " to what extent does it allow us to put in these G functions ? " And I don't know.

Well , no , but  I mean  What I uh the  So you could have four different Bayes - nets that you 're running , and then run your own  write your own function that would take the output of those four , and make your own " G function " , is what I was saying.

Yeah , that 's fine if it 's  if it comes only at the end. But suppose you want it embedded ?

Well , then you 'd have to break all of your Bayes - nets into smaller Bayes - nets , with all the


Well , no , but  I mean  What I uh the  So you could have four different Bayes - nets that you 're running , and then run your own  write your own function that would take the output of those four , and make your own " G function " , is what I was saying.

Yeah , that 's fine if it 's  if it comes only at the end. But suppose you want it embedded ?

Well , then you 'd have to break all of your Bayes - nets into smaller Bayes - nets , with all the

Oh , that  Yeah , that 's a truly horrible way to do d it. One would hope


Yeah , that 's fine if it 's  if it comes only at the end. But suppose you want it embedded ?

Well , then you 'd have to break all of your Bayes - nets into smaller Bayes - nets , with all the

Oh , that  Yeah , that 's a truly horrible way to do d it. One would hope


Well , then you 'd have to break all of your Bayes - nets into smaller Bayes - nets , with all the

Oh , that  Yeah , that 's a truly horrible way to do d it. One would hope


Oh , that  Yeah , that 's a truly horrible way to do d it. One would hope

Yeah , yeah , yeah , yeah , yeah , you bet. But , at that point you may say , " hey , Java Bayes isn't the only package in town. Let 's see if there 's another package that 's , eh , more civilized about this. "


Yeah , yeah , yeah , yeah , yeah , you bet. But , at that point you may say , " hey , Java Bayes isn't the only package in town. Let 's see if there 's another package that 's , eh , more civilized about this. "

Now , Srini is worth talking to on this ,


Yeah , yeah , yeah , yeah , yeah , you bet. But , at that point you may say , " hey , Java Bayes isn't the only package in town. Let 's see if there 's another package that 's , eh , more civilized about this. "

Now , Srini is worth talking to on this ,

cuz he said that he actually did hack some combining functions into But he doesn't remember  at least when I talked to him , he didn't remember  whether it was an e an easy thing , a natural thing , or whether he had to do some violence to it to make it work.


Now , Srini is worth talking to on this ,

cuz he said that he actually did hack some combining functions into But he doesn't remember  at least when I talked to him , he didn't remember  whether it was an e an easy thing , a natural thing , or whether he had to do some violence to it to make it work.


cuz he said that he actually did hack some combining functions into But he doesn't remember  at least when I talked to him , he didn't remember  whether it was an e an easy thing , a natural thing , or whether he had to do some violence to it to make it work.


cuz he said that he actually did hack some combining functions into But he doesn't remember  at least when I talked to him , he didn't remember  whether it was an e an easy thing , a natural thing , or whether he had to do some violence to it to make it work.

Yeah. I don't see why the , uh , combining f functions have to be directly hacked into I mean , they 're used to create tables so we can just make our own little functions that create tables in XML.


Yeah. I don't see why the , uh , combining f functions have to be directly hacked into I mean , they 're used to create tables so we can just make our own little functions that create tables in XML.

Well , I say that 's one way to do it , is  is to just convert it int into a  into a C P T that you zip  It 's blown up , and is a  it 's , uh  it 's huge , but   it doesn't require any data fitting or complication.


Yeah. I don't see why the , uh , combining f functions have to be directly hacked into I mean , they 're used to create tables so we can just make our own little functions that create tables in XML.

Well , I say that 's one way to do it , is  is to just convert it int into a  into a C P T that you zip  It 's blown up , and is a  it 's , uh  it 's huge , but   it doesn't require any data fitting or complication.

Mm - hmm. Yeah. I don't think  I mean , the fact that it blown u blows up is a huge issue in the sense that  I mean , OK. So say it blows up , right ? So there 's , like , the you know , ten , f ten , fifteen , uh , things. It 's gonna be like , two to the  that , which isn't so bad.


Yeah. I don't see why the , uh , combining f functions have to be directly hacked into I mean , they 're used to create tables so we can just make our own little functions that create tables in XML.

Well , I say that 's one way to do it , is  is to just convert it int into a  into a C P T that you zip  It 's blown up , and is a  it 's , uh  it 's huge , but   it doesn't require any data fitting or complication.

Mm - hmm. Yeah. I don't think  I mean , the fact that it blown u blows up is a huge issue in the sense that  I mean , OK. So say it blows up , right ? So there 's , like , the you know , ten , f ten , fifteen , uh , things. It 's gonna be like , two to the  that , which isn't so bad.

I I understand. I 'm just saying tha that w That was wi that was my note. The little note I sent said that. It said , " Here 's the way you 'd take the logical f G function and turn it into a CPT. "


Well , I say that 's one way to do it , is  is to just convert it int into a  into a C P T that you zip  It 's blown up , and is a  it 's , uh  it 's huge , but   it doesn't require any data fitting or complication.

Mm - hmm. Yeah. I don't think  I mean , the fact that it blown u blows up is a huge issue in the sense that  I mean , OK. So say it blows up , right ? So there 's , like , the you know , ten , f ten , fifteen , uh , things. It 's gonna be like , two to the  that , which isn't so bad.

I I understand. I 'm just saying tha that w That was wi that was my note. The little note I sent said that. It said , " Here 's the way you 'd take the logical f G function and turn it into a CPT. "


Mm - hmm. Yeah. I don't think  I mean , the fact that it blown u blows up is a huge issue in the sense that  I mean , OK. So say it blows up , right ? So there 's , like , the you know , ten , f ten , fifteen , uh , things. It 's gonna be like , two to the  that , which isn't so bad.

I I understand. I 'm just saying tha that w That was wi that was my note. The little note I sent said that. It said , " Here 's the way you 'd take the logical f G function and turn it into a CPT. "

I mean that  the Max - the Evidence - Combining function. So we could do that. And maybe that 's what we 'll do. But , um don't know. So , I will , e  e before next week , uh , @ @  p push  push some more on  on this stuff that Dekai Wu did , and try to understand it. Uh , you 'll make a couple of more copies of the Heckerman paper to give to people ?


I I understand. I 'm just saying tha that w That was wi that was my note. The little note I sent said that. It said , " Here 's the way you 'd take the logical f G function and turn it into a CPT. "

I mean that  the Max - the Evidence - Combining function. So we could do that. And maybe that 's what we 'll do. But , um don't know. So , I will , e  e before next week , uh , @ @  p push  push some more on  on this stuff that Dekai Wu did , and try to understand it. Uh , you 'll make a couple of more copies of the Heckerman paper to give to people ?


I mean that  the Max - the Evidence - Combining function. So we could do that. And maybe that 's what we 'll do. But , um don't know. So , I will , e  e before next week , uh , @ @  p push  push some more on  on this stuff that Dekai Wu did , and try to understand it. Uh , you 'll make a couple of more copies of the Heckerman paper to give to people ?


OK. And I I 'll  I 'll think s through this , uh ,  eh  getting EVA vectors dynamically out of ontologies one more time because I s I  I  I 'm not quite sure whether we all think of the same thing or not , here.


OK. And I I 'll  I 'll think s through this , uh ,  eh  getting EVA vectors dynamically out of ontologies one more time because I s I  I  I 'm not quite sure whether we all think of the same thing or not , here.

Alright , great ! And , Robert , thank you for  coming in under  He  he 's been sick , Robert.


Alright , great ! And , Robert , thank you for  coming in under  He  he 's been sick , Robert.


Alright , great ! And , Robert , thank you for  coming in under  He  he 's been sick , Robert.

I was thinking maybe we should just cough into the microphone and see if they can't  th see if they can handle it.


I was thinking maybe we should just cough into the microphone and see if they can't  th see if they can handle it.


So in last meeting we have discussed the conceptual design and we asked you to prepare a prototype for the for the remote control.

So .  So let's see the  what did you prepare.


So .  So let's see the  what did you prepare.

Yeah , so can you go out to the shared folder ? Mm the shared folder.


So .  So let's see the  what did you prepare.

Yeah , so can you go out to the shared folder ? Mm the shared folder.

Sh share folder for th your presentation ?


Yeah , so can you go out to the shared folder ? Mm the shared folder.

Sh share folder for th your presentation ?


Sh share folder for th your presentation ?

Uh   So I got the participant uh three. W uh . Three. It's the final design , yeah.


Uh   So I got the participant uh three. W uh . Three. It's the final design , yeah.


Right.  And uh  so we have   and we we are both agreed on some two versions of the prototypes , because we were no not decided whether we wanted to have an L_C_D_ or not because it's too expensive. So we come up with two versions. One with and one without L_C_D_s. Um but both comes with a charger and then detachable and uh or  control module. And detachable big buttons for all people um. So .


Right.  And uh  so we have   and we we are both agreed on some two versions of the prototypes , because we were no not decided whether we wanted to have an L_C_D_ or not because it's too expensive. So we come up with two versions. One with and one without L_C_D_s. Um but both comes with a charger and then detachable and uh or  control module. And detachable big buttons for all people um. So .

S okay so I'll show you the the two prototypes . Here we have the first one with the beautiful uh L_C_D_ um display. You you can s here. And you can uh just um browse into the the navigation menu by uh joystick joystick-like uh button.


Right.  And uh  so we have   and we we are both agreed on some two versions of the prototypes , because we were no not decided whether we wanted to have an L_C_D_ or not because it's too expensive. So we come up with two versions. One with and one without L_C_D_s. Um but both comes with a charger and then detachable and uh or  control module. And detachable big buttons for all people um. So .

S okay so I'll show you the the two prototypes . Here we have the first one with the beautiful uh L_C_D_ um display. You you can s here. And you can uh just um browse into the the navigation menu by uh joystick joystick-like uh button.

You can uh choose the direction and if you just push on it it's considered like a enter function.


S okay so I'll show you the the two prototypes . Here we have the first one with the beautiful uh L_C_D_ um display. You you can s here. And you can uh just um browse into the the navigation menu by uh joystick joystick-like uh button.

You can uh choose the direction and if you just push on it it's considered like a enter function.


You can uh choose the direction and if you just push on it it's considered like a enter function.

You have on the mm on the side here the microphone for the  for the speech recognition system here.


You can uh choose the direction and if you just push on it it's considered like a enter function.

You have on the mm on the side here the microphone for the  for the speech recognition system here.

And here the the switch that control if you want


You have on the mm on the side here the microphone for the  for the speech recognition system here.

And here the the switch that control if you want

Why you why you you put it in the the side ?


And here the the switch that control if you want

Why you why you you put it in the the side ?


Why you why you you put it in the the side ?


No i i it's the all around camer uh microphone isn't it. The the microphone picks up the speeches from anywhere.


No i i it's the all around camer uh microphone isn't it. The the microphone picks up the speeches from anywhere.

Is it an only a single mic or a microphone array ?


Is it an only a single mic or a microphone array ?

Oh it's very costly , microphone array .


Oh it's very costly , microphone array .


it's just a single microphone , and you  I I think uh we we put it here because I think when you when you are browsing your L_C_D_ you will be close to


it's just a single microphone , and you  I I think uh we we put it here because I think when you when you are browsing your L_C_D_ you will be close to

well it's better to to to place it here th than here , for instance.


well it's better to to to place it here th than here , for instance.


well it's better to to to place it here th than here , for instance.

And here is a little switch that control if you want the the speaker uh recognition system to um to be on or off. And uh so this remote control comes up with its charger.


And here is a little switch that control if you want the the speaker uh recognition system to um to be on or off. And uh so this remote control comes up with its charger.


And here is a little switch that control if you want the the speaker uh recognition system to um to be on or off. And uh so this remote control comes up with its charger.

Well this this prototype is um made for about uh well fi fi fifteen fifteen dollars


Well this this prototype is um made for about uh well fi fi fifteen fifteen dollars


but uh well it's not it's not uh  yeah , but uh it's just a prototype and if we uh if we optimises the um the uh  voila.


but uh well it's not it's not uh  yeah , but uh it's just a prototype and if we uh if we optimises the um the uh  voila.

Yeah the  and the the production costs we we can achieve uh about ten dollars.


Yeah the  and the the production costs we we can achieve uh about ten dollars.


Now what is the whole day rating for that ?


Oh yeah it's just a r uh simple battery a rechargeable uh


Oh yeah it's just a r uh simple battery a rechargeable uh

Something like a two A_ , A_ three size batteries ?


Something like a two A_ , A_ three size batteries ?


So and if you want to charge the battery you just put the remote control like that to plug in the the charger


So and if you want to charge the battery you just put the remote control like that to plug in the the charger

and uh leave it uh alone , it's alright.


and uh leave it uh alone , it's alright.


I forgot to tell you there is only a single button there , b this button


I forgot to tell you there is only a single button there , b this button

yeah alright. This button is like the mouse  is like a joystick ,


I forgot to tell you there is only a single button there , b this button

yeah alright. This button is like the mouse  is like a joystick ,

you can move in three hundred and sixty degrees of direction so you can make a turn and it  the additi functions associated to all the actions you ma you have a click you have a double click all in a single button .


yeah alright. This button is like the mouse  is like a joystick ,

you can move in three hundred and sixty degrees of direction so you can make a turn and it  the additi functions associated to all the actions you ma you have a click you have a double click all in a single button .


yeah alright. This button is like the mouse  is like a joystick ,

you can move in three hundred and sixty degrees of direction so you can make a turn and it  the additi functions associated to all the actions you ma you have a click you have a double click all in a single button .

You can move up , down , left , right , or you can do a swing. So a swing to the left , a swing to the right defines other functions. So even though it's a single button , but it is pretty s flexible because of the three hundred and sixty degree movement .


you can move in three hundred and sixty degrees of direction so you can make a turn and it  the additi functions associated to all the actions you ma you have a click you have a double click all in a single button .

You can move up , down , left , right , or you can do a swing. So a swing to the left , a swing to the right defines other functions. So even though it's a single button , but it is pretty s flexible because of the three hundred and sixty degree movement .

And the L_C_D_ is this one , on the remote ?


You can move up , down , left , right , or you can do a swing. So a swing to the left , a swing to the right defines other functions. So even though it's a single button , but it is pretty s flexible because of the three hundred and sixty degree movement .

And the L_C_D_ is this one , on the remote ?

Yeah. This is the version y that comes with L_C_D_.


And the L_C_D_ is this one , on the remote ?

Yeah. This is the version y that comes with L_C_D_.


Yeah. This is the version y that comes with L_C_D_.

Here I present another version without the L_C_D_.


Here I present another version without the L_C_D_.

I think it's not a good idea because after maybe one or two months of function is  getting destroyed.


I think it's not a good idea because after maybe one or two months of function is  getting destroyed.


So we have the the second version also with the different uh button configuration. The second version is also simpler , we d uh we had just uh I have to put the microphone also .


Basically it's the same uh things uh uh as uh I presented before. But here we have uh we have uh four buttons for navigation. Press one button uh acting as a a enter button.


Basically it's the same uh things uh uh as uh I presented before. But here we have uh we have uh four buttons for navigation. Press one button uh acting as a a enter button.

So um yeah according to what you said it's more robust to the user.


So um yeah according to what you said it's more robust to the user.


So um yeah according to what you said it's more robust to the user.

And uh it's also cheaper to produce. We can produce uh such remote control for about uh four dollars.


And uh it's also cheaper to produce. We can produce uh such remote control for about uh four dollars.


And uh it's also cheaper to produce. We can produce uh such remote control for about uh four dollars.

And I think you forgot a point here to have an button to find the charger ,


And I think you forgot a point here to have an button to find the charger ,


And I think you forgot a point here to have an button to find the charger ,

th actually th we'll come to that point in our


th actually th we'll come to that point in our

Yeah it's it's it's embed in the uh speech recognition system.


Yeah it's it's it's embed in the uh speech recognition system.


and if you disable speech recognition system then ?


and if you disable speech recognition system then ?

W w I'll I'll come to that point later on.


W w I'll I'll come to that point later on.

And we will we will serve the charger with this ?


And we will we will serve the charger with this ?


Th they  either these with the  uh the the charger any


Th they  either these with the  uh the the charger any

in either versions you they they ha they use the same charger yeah.


Th they  either these with the  uh the the charger any

in either versions you they they ha they use the same charger yeah.

Okay so the price of the charger included in the


in either versions you they they ha they use the same charger yeah.

Okay so the price of the charger included in the

Uh it's a standard module so you should get it for a cheap price uh .


Okay so the price of the charger included in the

Uh it's a standard module so you should get it for a cheap price uh .


Uh it's a standard module so you should get it for a cheap price uh .


It's that same charger that you can use for the hand-phone but uh again depends on the types. I think we have to investigate more on that , but


It's that same charger that you can use for the hand-phone but uh again depends on the types. I think we have to investigate more on that , but

The price should be below twelve and a half Euro.


The price should be below twelve and a half Euro.

but as the Marketing Manager says , people is willing to  people are willing to pay more for good design.


but as the Marketing Manager says , people is willing to  people are willing to pay more for good design.


but as the Marketing Manager says , people is willing to  people are willing to pay more for good design.

but the company is not willing to invest more at the moment.


but the company is not willing to invest more at the moment.

The price of selling is twenty five Euros.


The price of selling is twenty five Euros.

Alright please uh go on Norman with the special features .


Alright please uh go on Norman with the special features .


Alright please uh go on Norman with the special features .

Yeah we'll we'll come up to that , the the the thing that makes this the controller cheap is that it is modular so you want more function you pay more. If you want less function i i if you want a reasonable price you pay for the functions that you add on to the system ,


Yeah we'll we'll come up to that , the the the thing that makes this the controller cheap is that it is modular so you want more function you pay more. If you want less function i i if you want a reasonable price you pay for the functions that you add on to the system ,

That's for this basis function and if you want more you pay more.


That's for this basis function and if you want more you pay more.

for example the L_C_D_ , you can take it you can put it  put it back in , or you can use the other one ,


for example the L_C_D_ , you can take it you can put it  put it back in , or you can use the other one ,


for example the L_C_D_ , you can take it you can put it  put it back in , or you can use the other one ,

or  the speech recogniser with the microphone yeah yeah.


or  the speech recogniser with the microphone yeah yeah.

You want a microphone to put in the  speech recogniser you don't wan you pay less for the system you see .


You want a microphone to put in the  speech recogniser you don't wan you pay less for the system you see .


It's pretty flexible in the yeah price .


It's pretty flexible in the yeah price .

You also have the the the two other modules for the parental control


You also have the the the two other modules for the parental control

that that you ca you can add up  to the  to your remote control


that that you ca you can add up  to the  to your remote control


that that you ca you can add up  to the  to your remote control

i i if you uh if you want to to have more more power on what you do , and uh which channel you want to choose and so on.


i i if you uh if you want to to have more more power on what you do , and uh which channel you want to choose and so on.

H here is just the the the module for the kids and th if the parents want to watch T_V_ , up  they come up with their modules ,


H here is just the the the module for the kids and th if the parents want to watch T_V_ , up  they come up with their modules ,


and they can have all the control they want here.


and they can have all the control they want here.

We also have this module for uh old people with big buttons , clearly labelled ,


We also have this module for uh old people with big buttons , clearly labelled ,


the i the idea the the conceptual idea is that simplicity and powerful. Simplicity meaning that we have few buttons , powerful is that all the controls with  the one you saw we saw earlier in the meetings with lots of buttons n but here you only have few buttons but you retain the mm the same powerful functionalities. But in addition with simplicity. So that's the best idea , the cond that that's our uh an innovation um uh i in this uh design here .


the i the idea the the conceptual idea is that simplicity and powerful. Simplicity meaning that we have few buttons , powerful is that all the controls with  the one you saw we saw earlier in the meetings with lots of buttons n but here you only have few buttons but you retain the mm the same powerful functionalities. But in addition with simplicity. So that's the best idea , the cond that that's our uh an innovation um uh i in this uh design here .

Okay now we come to other important features that I did not tell you. The first one is the speech recogniser , again it's detachable or add-on. And then we also have security feature for example this here  oop


the i the idea the the conceptual idea is that simplicity and powerful. Simplicity meaning that we have few buttons , powerful is that all the controls with  the one you saw we saw earlier in the meetings with lots of buttons n but here you only have few buttons but you retain the mm the same powerful functionalities. But in addition with simplicity. So that's the best idea , the cond that that's our uh an innovation um uh i in this uh design here .

Okay now we come to other important features that I did not tell you. The first one is the speech recogniser , again it's detachable or add-on. And then we also have security feature for example this here  oop

it's very robust  , it doesn't break and the material , what's the material again ?


Okay now we come to other important features that I did not tell you. The first one is the speech recogniser , again it's detachable or add-on. And then we also have security feature for example this here  oop

it's very robust  , it doesn't break and the material , what's the material again ?


it's very robust  , it doesn't break and the material , what's the material again ?


Again uh and the battery life is uh is an is an endurable one , again because this is A_A_ batteries you can choose the types of battery you want.


Again uh and the battery life is uh is an is an endurable one , again because this is A_A_ batteries you can choose the types of battery you want.

Lithium-ion may be a good one , but you can replace it with cheaper one , again you pay for what you get , and then um y the other p points are robust and misplacement reminder. So when you finish watching your T_V_  and you the you t you turn off the T_V_ , uh and then there's this message coming out that uh please put that back to the charger , so so that's the  or is it


Lithium-ion may be a good one , but you can replace it with cheaper one , again you pay for what you get , and then um y the other p points are robust and misplacement reminder. So when you finish watching your T_V_  and you the you t you turn off the T_V_ , uh and then there's this message coming out that uh please put that back to the charger , so so that's the  or is it

that's the reminder part. Yeah and um  And it also use a programmable channel and vocabulary , so we didn't define the vocabulary so it's up to the user to define


that's the reminder part. Yeah and um  And it also use a programmable channel and vocabulary , so we didn't define the vocabulary so it's up to the user to define


that's the reminder part. Yeah and um  And it also use a programmable channel and vocabulary , so we didn't define the vocabulary so it's up to the user to define

And then uh because of the chil because children are using the device so we have also a a  of T_V_ programmes by genre , and this can be used by the adult or by the children. So instead of choosing the channel you are choosing the T_V_ contents of the night. So it's pretty powerful , and that's that's why the num buttons are reduced , because of this feature. Yeah. And  and for the materials that is cheap to produce I think uh it's quite clear from  yeah .


And then uh because of the chil because children are using the device so we have also a a  of T_V_ programmes by genre , and this can be used by the adult or by the children. So instead of choosing the channel you are choosing the T_V_ contents of the night. So it's pretty powerful , and that's that's why the num buttons are reduced , because of this feature. Yeah. And  and for the materials that is cheap to produce I think uh it's quite clear from  yeah .

And also like the  and the fancy designs yeah.


And then uh because of the chil because children are using the device so we have also a a  of T_V_ programmes by genre , and this can be used by the adult or by the children. So instead of choosing the channel you are choosing the T_V_ contents of the night. So it's pretty powerful , and that's that's why the num buttons are reduced , because of this feature. Yeah. And  and for the materials that is cheap to produce I think uh it's quite clear from  yeah .

And also like the  and the fancy designs yeah.

Maybe we can improve more on the design but


And also like the  and the fancy designs yeah.

Maybe we can improve more on the design but


Maybe we can improve more on the design but


Well so the price to produce  For uh the simplest one , say we start from four dollars to produce such a device.


Well so the price to produce  For uh the simplest one , say we start from four dollars to produce such a device.

Uh it's about it  The  without without the charger


Uh it's about it  The  without without the charger


it's about uh well two dollars to produce uh the microphone and speech recognition systems.


it's about uh well two dollars to produce uh the microphone and speech recognition systems.

Two dollars for the uh for the add-on modules , and finally three dollars for the charger. So if you uh sum up uh everything wi with the L_C_D_  , which costs two dollar , you have two plus four plus four plus two plus two.


Two dollars for the uh for the add-on modules , and finally three dollars for the charger. So if you uh sum up uh everything wi with the L_C_D_  , which costs two dollar , you have two plus four plus four plus two plus two.


so the total cost if you if you want all the fuct functionalities will be about uh fifteen dollars.


so the total cost if you if you want all the fuct functionalities will be about uh fifteen dollars.

Charger we don't have charger here either.


Charger we don't have charger here either.

But it's just if you want all functionalities.


But it's just if you want all functionalities.


but we have an other inputs from the l public demands.


but we have an other inputs from the l public demands.

I think we will just have a rough look and then we can make our statements , and we can finalise the product based on this discu


I think we will just have a rough look and then we can make our statements , and we can finalise the product based on this discu

I think we can just go to my presentation then. We can wind up. Or we could uh come to some f uh final conclusions.


I think we can just go to my presentation then. We can wind up. Or we could uh come to some f uh final conclusions.

So the marketing made an evaluation criteria and these were some of the findings , and uh in the market the people are not really interested with L_C_D_ , without L_C_D_ , with speech recognition interface , or without speech recognition interface , but most of the people what they are interested is  first thing is , they want to have an fancy look and feel , it should be very fancy with colourful and uh very handy to hold.


I think we can just go to my presentation then. We can wind up. Or we could uh come to some f uh final conclusions.

So the marketing made an evaluation criteria and these were some of the findings , and uh in the market the people are not really interested with L_C_D_ , without L_C_D_ , with speech recognition interface , or without speech recognition interface , but most of the people what they are interested is  first thing is , they want to have an fancy look and feel , it should be very fancy with colourful and uh very handy to hold.

And the second thing is it should be much more technologically innovative.


So the marketing made an evaluation criteria and these were some of the findings , and uh in the market the people are not really interested with L_C_D_ , without L_C_D_ , with speech recognition interface , or without speech recognition interface , but most of the people what they are interested is  first thing is , they want to have an fancy look and feel , it should be very fancy with colourful and uh very handy to hold.

And the second thing is it should be much more technologically innovative.

Of course in that we could put L_C_D_ or recognition to be more technologically innovative. And the third one is easy to use.


And the second thing is it should be much more technologically innovative.

Of course in that we could put L_C_D_ or recognition to be more technologically innovative. And the third one is easy to use.


And the second thing is it should be much more technologically innovative.

Of course in that we could put L_C_D_ or recognition to be more technologically innovative. And the third one is easy to use.

Well I think that the technical in innovation is is in the product itself since we haven't yet a remote who are allowing to to choose interactively with the T_V_ screen uh uh with just four buttons.


Of course in that we could put L_C_D_ or recognition to be more technologically innovative. And the third one is easy to use.

Well I think that the technical in innovation is is in the product itself since we haven't yet a remote who are allowing to to choose interactively with the T_V_ screen uh uh with just four buttons.

Okay and if we go to the next slide , here you can find  these are the latest fashion updates , and so this  in Paris and Milan  they have detected this trends that the this year it's going to be an year of fruit and vegetable , so people are really interested to see if they have an remote in the shape of the fruit or a vegetable , or whatever they like.


Well I think that the technical in innovation is is in the product itself since we haven't yet a remote who are allowing to to choose interactively with the T_V_ screen uh uh with just four buttons.

Okay and if we go to the next slide , here you can find  these are the latest fashion updates , and so this  in Paris and Milan  they have detected this trends that the this year it's going to be an year of fruit and vegetable , so people are really interested to see if they have an remote in the shape of the fruit or a vegetable , or whatever they like.


Well I think that the technical in innovation is is in the product itself since we haven't yet a remote who are allowing to to choose interactively with the T_V_ screen uh uh with just four buttons.

Okay and if we go to the next slide , here you can find  these are the latest fashion updates , and so this  in Paris and Milan  they have detected this trends that the this year it's going to be an year of fruit and vegetable , so people are really interested to see if they have an remote in the shape of the fruit or a vegetable , or whatever they like.

So I think it should be much more customised to make a different uh shapes.


Okay and if we go to the next slide , here you can find  these are the latest fashion updates , and so this  in Paris and Milan  they have detected this trends that the this year it's going to be an year of fruit and vegetable , so people are really interested to see if they have an remote in the shape of the fruit or a vegetable , or whatever they like.

So I think it should be much more customised to make a different uh shapes.


So I think it should be much more customised to make a different uh shapes.

And the second thing is , and if the material , they really do not want it to be very hard , as in the case of very pl plastic or titanium , it should be somewhat spongy.


So I think it should be much more customised to make a different uh shapes.

And the second thing is , and if the material , they really do not want it to be very hard , as in the case of very pl plastic or titanium , it should be somewhat spongy.

But the the problem is that uh   is it robust to mishandling ?


And the second thing is , and if the material , they really do not want it to be very hard , as in the case of very pl plastic or titanium , it should be somewhat spongy.

But the the problem is that uh   is it robust to mishandling ?


And the second thing is , and if the material , they really do not want it to be very hard , as in the case of very pl plastic or titanium , it should be somewhat spongy.

But the the problem is that uh   is it robust to mishandling ?

We have  you should find a material that is robust at the same time spongy .


But the the problem is that uh   is it robust to mishandling ?

We have  you should find a material that is robust at the same time spongy .


We have  you should find a material that is robust at the same time spongy .

Yeah so uh  so finally we have these three criterias.


Yeah so uh  so finally we have these three criterias.

One is fancy look , second is innovative , and third is easy to use.


Yeah so uh  so finally we have these three criterias.

One is fancy look , second is innovative , and third is easy to use.

So these are the f uh three criteria on which we are going to build our remote.


One is fancy look , second is innovative , and third is easy to use.

So these are the f uh three criteria on which we are going to build our remote.


One is fancy look , second is innovative , and third is easy to use.

So these are the f uh three criteria on which we are going to build our remote.

So  and we have an evaluation criteria for each one of these ,


So these are the f uh three criteria on which we are going to build our remote.

So  and we have an evaluation criteria for each one of these ,


So  and we have an evaluation criteria for each one of these ,

say that we have a seven point scale , from one to seven ,


say that we have a seven point scale , from one to seven ,

and for each of the product you could just give me the scale according to this.


and for each of the product you could just give me the scale according to this.

So now you have with L_C_D_ and without L_C_D_ ,


So now you have with L_C_D_ and without L_C_D_ ,

so on this scale , if it is true , if it is  if it has a fancy look you could just tell me one , or if it is false , it doesn't  it looks uh  it doesn't look much fancy , then you could just tell me seven. So


so on this scale , if it is true , if it is  if it has a fancy look you could just tell me one , or if it is false , it doesn't  it looks uh  it doesn't look much fancy , then you could just tell me seven. So


so on this scale , if it is true , if it is  if it has a fancy look you could just tell me one , or if it is false , it doesn't  it looks uh  it doesn't look much fancy , then you could just tell me seven. So

so is the e evaluation depending on us or other users ?


so is the e evaluation depending on us or other users ?

No no we have  you have designed two products now ,


No no we have  you have designed two products now ,


But who will give the scoring uh we ourself or or a third party ?


But who will give the scoring uh we ourself or or a third party ?

According to you , no according to you designers , how will feel  does it uh with L_C_D_ and without L_C_D_ ?


According to you , no according to you designers , how will feel  does it uh with L_C_D_ and without L_C_D_ ?

Okay let us make this L_ and without L_C_D_. On on this scale the L_C_D_ remote control. How do you look  how does it look ?


Okay let us make this L_ and without L_C_D_. On on this scale the L_C_D_ remote control. How do you look  how does it look ?

D is it very fancy or doesn't look much fancy ?


Okay let us make this L_ and without L_C_D_. On on this scale the L_C_D_ remote control. How do you look  how does it look ?

D is it very fancy or doesn't look much fancy ?

Well it doesn't look much fancy I'll I'll say three or four.


D is it very fancy or doesn't look much fancy ?

Well it doesn't look much fancy I'll I'll say three or four.


Well it doesn't look much fancy I'll I'll say three or four.


Som someone um commented this is like a the stone age uh   design.


Som someone um commented this is like a the stone age uh   design.

Um we have been focused all all this  time on the  on the technical aspect , functional aspect , but also the simplicity.


Um we have been focused all all this  time on the  on the technical aspect , functional aspect , but also the simplicity.


Um we have been focused all all this  time on the  on the technical aspect , functional aspect , but also the simplicity.

As for the design maybe we c should hire a designer to help .


As for the design maybe we c should hire a designer to help .


As for the design maybe we c should hire a designer to help .

So without L_C_D_ how would you rate it ?


So without L_C_D_ how would you rate it ?


So without L_C_D_ how would you rate it ?

Uh four. I think it's it's uh more easy to make f fancy things when it's not complicated


Uh four. I think it's it's uh more easy to make f fancy things when it's not complicated

so removing the L_C_D_ um gives us a li more liberty to to have a fancy look.


so removing the L_C_D_ um gives us a li more liberty to to have a fancy look.

And in the sense of innovativeness , with L_C_D_.


so removing the L_C_D_ um gives us a li more liberty to to have a fancy look.

And in the sense of innovativeness , with L_C_D_.

Well it's it's the same for both so  I will give a five , six.


And in the sense of innovativeness , with L_C_D_.

Well it's it's the same for both so  I will give a five , six.


Well it's it's the same for both so  I will give a five , six.


from the innovation aspect I feel that uh what is most innovative of our prototype compared to the existing prototypes that we saw l in the last meeting is that um  the retrieval of T_V_ programmes by content , because uh that is really innovative , and for now  and another innovation we have is simplicity and  simplicity , few buttons , we've uh   A lot of functionalities.


Our gi I think that the our our product is uh has the best in all  well this is a biased judgement


Our gi I think that the our our product is uh has the best in all  well this is a biased judgement

No no according to design aspect we want to know how would you feel the innovativeness ?


Our gi I think that the our our product is uh has the best in all  well this is a biased judgement

No no according to design aspect we want to know how would you feel the innovativeness ?

Yeah.  Uh the innovation is v is very high I think.


No no according to design aspect we want to know how would you feel the innovativeness ?

Yeah.  Uh the innovation is v is very high I think.


Yeah.  Uh the innovation is v is very high I think.


Mm for both it's the the same innovations.


Mm for both it's the the same innovations.

For both. It's the same innovation. So maybe I can put six to seven.


For both. It's the same innovation. So maybe I can put six to seven.


No actually uh to make it with L_C_D_ you make more efforts. So I  there is high innovativeness included if you make it with L_C_D_ y


No actually uh to make it with L_C_D_ you make more efforts. So I  there is high innovativeness included if you make it with L_C_D_ y

then when it is without L_C_D_ there is not much innovativeness.


then when it is without L_C_D_ there is not much innovativeness.


then when it is without L_C_D_ there is not much innovativeness.

Uh uh uh there w there was a there was a issue here is that what are what is the display on the L_C_D_ ?


Uh uh uh there w there was a there was a issue here is that what are what is the display on the L_C_D_ ?


Uh uh uh there w there was a there was a issue here is that what are what is the display on the L_C_D_ ?

We haven't really uh determined  what are  actually actually


We haven't really uh determined  what are  actually actually

I mean that what you are sayin that's what the design


We haven't really uh determined  what are  actually actually

I mean that what you are sayin that's what the design

it's good to have a L_C_D_ but what are we gonna display on a L_C_D_ ?


I mean that what you are sayin that's what the design

it's good to have a L_C_D_ but what are we gonna display on a L_C_D_ ?

I mean on the L_C_D_ , according to what I understand from your model is , you have a joystick here , and you have L_C_D_ , you just press your joystick , you get here a programme.


it's good to have a L_C_D_ but what are we gonna display on a L_C_D_ ?

I mean on the L_C_D_ , according to what I understand from your model is , you have a joystick here , and you have L_C_D_ , you just press your joystick , you get here a programme.


I mean on the L_C_D_ , according to what I understand from your model is , you have a joystick here , and you have L_C_D_ , you just press your joystick , you get here a programme.


but you have the same programme on the T_V_ screen.


No on the T_V_ you don't it doesn't display on the T_V_ now.


No on the T_V_ you don't it doesn't display on the T_V_ now.

L_C_D_ ? Then uh there is no meaning in having it on the T_V_.


L_C_D_ ? Then uh there is no meaning in having it on the T_V_.

Or then again you have a channels , volume and all the stuff and what a


Or then again you have a channels , volume and all the stuff and what a

I mean that depends upon your design , so


Or then again you have a channels , volume and all the stuff and what a

I mean that depends upon your design , so

Anyway for for the users who who who opt for L_C_D_  we'll give them the give them the L_C_D_ ,


I mean that depends upon your design , so

Anyway for for the users who who who opt for L_C_D_  we'll give them the give them the L_C_D_ ,


I mean that depends upon your design , so

Anyway for for the users who who who opt for L_C_D_  we'll give them the give them the L_C_D_ ,

we give what the customer uh wants , right.


Anyway for for the users who who who opt for L_C_D_  we'll give them the give them the L_C_D_ ,

we give what the customer uh wants , right.


we give what the customer uh wants , right.

So without L_C_D_ you want to put it fi the same level of innovativeness ? And which  do you recommend e easy to use , with L_C_D_ or without L_C_D_ ?


we give what the customer uh wants , right.

So without L_C_D_ you want to put it fi the same level of innovativeness ? And which  do you recommend e easy to use , with L_C_D_ or without L_C_D_ ?

Well I think both are really easy to use because there are few button buttons ,


So without L_C_D_ you want to put it fi the same level of innovativeness ? And which  do you recommend e easy to use , with L_C_D_ or without L_C_D_ ?

Well I think both are really easy to use because there are few button buttons ,


So without L_C_D_ you want to put it fi the same level of innovativeness ? And which  do you recommend e easy to use , with L_C_D_ or without L_C_D_ ?

Well I think both are really easy to use because there are few button buttons ,

and uh well t p the menu are clear , well-organised , so