Mohon tunggu...
Asep Setiawan
Asep Setiawan Mohon Tunggu... Membahasakan fantasi. Menulis untuk membentuk revolusi. Dedicated to the rebels.

Nalar, Nurani, Nyali. Curious, Critical, Rebellious. Mindset, Mindmap, Mindful

Selanjutnya

Tutup

Inovasi

Toward Interpretative Language Model: a CAS Framework with Six Interaction Variables to Capture Implicit Meaning

7 Juli 2025   16:49 Diperbarui: 7 Juli 2025   16:49 157
+
Laporkan Konten
Laporkan Akun
Kompasiana adalah platform blog. Konten ini menjadi tanggung jawab bloger dan tidak mewakili pandangan redaksi Kompas.
Lihat foto
Bagikan ide kreativitasmu dalam bentuk konten di Kompasiana | Sumber gambar: Freepik

In practice, we implement interaction probability within the CAS-6 tensor (Section 3.3) as:

Iij(3)=Pij=fij+rij+eijI_{ij}^{(3)} = P = f + r + e

This allows the probability axis to remain differentiable and learnable within an LLM's architecture while preserving multi-factorial semantics.

By decoupling interaction probability from mere frequency and enriching it with semantic resonance and predictive entanglement, the CAS-6 model captures deeper, cognitively aligned patterns in language. This redefinition is pivotal in advancing LLMs toward true interpretive AI, capable of understanding subtle meaning beyond word counts.

3.5 Interaction Weight: Inhibition, Synergy, and Semiotic Tension

While interaction probability (Section 3.4) captures how likely a word pair or triad is to co-occur meaningfully, interaction weight introduces a critical qualitative axis: the valence or directional effect of that interaction on the final semantic construction. Within the CAS-6 framework, we model this as a continuous variable ranging from 2 (strongly inhibitive) to +2 (strongly synergistic), enabling AI models to infer how word interactions construct or destruct potential meaning spaces.

A. Conceptual Foundation: From Syntax to Semiosis

In classical linguistics and cognitive semantics, meaning emerges not merely from presence but from relational force between concepts (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980). For instance:

The phrase "stone heart" combines two denotatively unrelated concepts.
Yet their interplay leads to a powerful metaphor of emotional coldness.
In this case, "stone" inhibits the affective openness of "heart"---yielding a highly loaded figurative meaning.
This semiotic tension, marked by a negative interaction weight, is a source of both complexity and aesthetic depth. On the other hand:

"gentle breeze" represents a synergistic pairing, where both components reinforce a shared semantic domain (calmness, nature, softness).
B. Formal Definition of Interaction Weight (w)

Let each directed interaction between word i and word j carry a weight:

Mohon tunggu...

Lihat Konten Inovasi Selengkapnya
Lihat Inovasi Selengkapnya
Beri Komentar
Berkomentarlah secara bijaksana dan bertanggung jawab. Komentar sepenuhnya menjadi tanggung jawab komentator seperti diatur dalam UU ITE

Belum ada komentar. Jadilah yang pertama untuk memberikan komentar!
LAPORKAN KONTEN
Alasan
Laporkan Konten
Laporkan Akun