Good Peoples, (01)
One "cognitive system" approach to image vetting I am aware of does not
store information in a localized structure, but a distributed structure. (02)
This system also separates visual colors into three data components, and
edge/contrast information as a forth disparate data component. This system
is able to very rapidly, considering the slowness of this particular
system... very rapidly vets complete images from a contextual significance
at a real-time basis. (03)
Such a system is devised to store information as exploded components, but
the pieces themselves are organized toward efficient query harvest to enable
the information to track contextual pertinence beneath the
assembled-information-packages in such way that the packages "seem" to the
observer to "be" the relevance, rather than the sub-contextual relevancies
that must be tracked separately to afford contextual pertinence toward
mission. (04)
Such an approach with character-string-protocols and bitmap and
character-string-wise vetting on a client site from multiple sub-contextual
and relevant themes of a human topical mission would require initial
overhead and engineering that may not interest investor groups toward a
sudden-profit, while there are the direct and obvious monotonic document
approaches used everywhere in every facet of "modern" technology and
"commercialized" computer science. (05)
Oh yes, the four part visual system I'm referring to is a sub-system of the
animal brain. Rumor is that some higher mammals have such semantic
ascription applied to the resultant concepts of disparate resolution of
cause and outcome that cultures are often reified to outcome constraint
based merely on these symbolic assemblies of tokens comprising the assembled
images. (06)
Regards, (07)
DonEMitchell@xxxxxxxxx
Regular Dynamics of Sequim (08)
-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Patrick Cassidy
Sent: Friday, July 11, 2003 7:05 PM
To: Adam Pease
Cc: [ontolog-forum]
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Invoice ontology discussion points/issues (09)
Adam's reply to my comments (below) demonstrates that there
are significantly different approaches to representing
"documents" (generically, information-bearing physical
objects and the abstract informational content thereof).
I was pointing out that Cyc (and my own preferences)
include explicitly within the class hierarchy the abstract
informational entities themselves, and the relations between
informational entities, and also the relations between the
informational entities and the physical objects that represent
that information. <snip> (010)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (011)
|