[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] nuts and bolts

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Patrick Cassidy <pcassidy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 22:17:23 -0400
Message-id: <3E9F6033.9060004@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
I have a suggestion about what I think needs to be done
even before we get to Adam's step 1, creating an
ontology in protege.  Specifically, we need to
decide how to specify what the relations between
the classes (slots in Protege, predicates in SUMO)
are intended to mean.  The meaning of the predicate,
for example (hasPart Automobile Engine) would need
to be specified by axioms unless there is a default
interpretation of such predicates.
    Cyc has one mechanism to simplify the applications
of axiomatic rules, the RuleMacroPredicate.  For
the "part" predicate, one might use the RuleMacroPredicate
"relationAllExists", and apply it thus:
(relationAllExists hasPart Automobile Engine)
This would mean that for every instance of an Automobile
there has to be at least one object of class Engine.
There would have to be additional constraints, such as
that the Part must be smaller than the whole object.
We also have to decide whether, e.g. an automobile is still
an automobile if the engine has been removed for repair --
i.e. can we say we have an 'Automobile" if it is
disassembled?  We also need to decide how to indicate
that some objects have optional parts (chrome trim?),
and I would like to have a mechanism for indicating
probabilities of relations (this gets into encyclopedic
knowledge, but we at least need the mechanism even if it
is not often used in the earliest stages).
    I interpret Adam's suggested methodology to mean that
we can get into such details later, in stage 2, but
I think that they should be tackled at the earliest stage,
since the relations are central to the interpretation of
he meanings of the classes.  We don't need to get into
philosophical dialogues, but we do need some firm
criteria for deciding whether we do or don't have an
automobile in our garage at any given time.
     I will be away for the next week and will check
back when I return.    (01)

========================================    (02)

Leo Obrst wrote:
> 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.
> Leo
> Adam Pease wrote:
>     (03)

Patrick Cassidy    (04)

MICRA, Inc.                      || (908) 561-3416
735 Belvidere Ave.               || (908) 668-5252 (if no answer)
Plainfield, NJ 07062-2054        || (908) 668-5904 (fax)    (05)

internet:   cassidy@xxxxxxxxx
=============================================    (06)

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (07)

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