[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] nuts and bolts

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Leo Obrst <lobrst@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 18:26:18 -0400
Message-id: <3E9F2A09.BCDE6278@xxxxxxxxx>
Thanks for your suggestions, Adam. They are indeed useful. It would have been close to what I would have expressed, had I a bit more time (though, hedging a bit more on the upper ontology ;) ).

Folks, these are useful guidelines.


Adam Pease wrote:

   Within the space of our methodology I might suggest a minimal
nuts-and-bolts explanation of how to get the job done.

1.  Use Protege to define the class hierarchy and properties of classes
   a.  Find classes in SUMO that are relevant and record a mapping from UBL
to SUMO as being either equal, subsuming or instance.
        i.  type a single word that relates to the UBL term in the "SUMO term" or
"English Word" text areas at
   b.  Create a subclass of SUMO if it's a subsuming mapping
   c.  Add properties to the subclass, either by reusing SUMO properties,
or by extending SUMO properties by creating a &%subrelation of an existing
   d.  Add English definition to the class to define constraints that
express how the subclass is more specific than the superclass

2.  Switch from using Protege to using a text editor to express the classes
and properties in KIF and begin creating axioms, based on the English
definitions created previously.

   A related question is how to create an application that uses this
ontology.  There are many options that can be grouped roughly by the degree
to which they use the full expressive power of the definitions in the
ontology.  At one extreme is using the ontology like a set of precise
comments that a human software designer is supposed to read, and creating a
database schema or XML schema that uses the same terminology and structure
as the ontology.  A slightly more sophisticated approach would be to use
the axioms as comments that inform a programmer about what sorts of
constraints need to be checked in a stored procedure or Java code.
   An intermediate approach would be to use just a portion of the axioms
that are easily expressed and employed in a less expressive formalism such
as DAML+OIL or Prolog (horn clauses).
   At the other extreme would be employing a formal theorem prover, such as
SNARK, within the context of an intelligent reasoning system or agent that
employs the full set of axioms in the ontology.


Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Dr. Leo Obrst            The MITRE Corporation, Information Semantics
lobrst@xxxxxxxxx       Center for Innovative Computing & Informatics
Voice: 703-883-6770  7515 Colshire Drive, M/S H305
Fax: 703-883-1379      McLean, VA 22102-7508, USA

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>