Pat,
I appreciate all the work you're doing, but it needs to be reported a
bit more accurately. Protege can't represent SUMO's axioms. The field
into which you've entered them is essentially a comment field. As you've
noted, Protege can't even browse to those axioms properly, since in the
Protege language they're attached to only one class, rather than all the
terms used in the axiom.
For example, look at the following SUMO axiom, which says that any part
of an object is above the bottom of that object (which is not itself part
of the bottom part). (01)
(=>
(and
(bottom ?BOTTOM ?OBJECT)
(part ?PART ?OBJECT)
(not
(connected ?PART ?BOTTOM)))
(orientation ?PART ?BOTTOM Above)) (02)
This axiom contains several terms. The axiom is much a part of the
definition of "bottom" as it is of "part" or "Above", and yet if one
attached the axiom to "Above", one wouldn't see it when looking at
definitions for "bottom". I could note that orientation is a ternary
relation too, but since the axiom is only a comment, any text can be
included, and none of that text is part of the Protege ontology. (03)
Adam (04)
At 12:16 PM 8/13/2003 -0400, Patrick Cassidy wrote:
>(1) The question has been discussed of whether and how
>axioms can be represented in Protege. I have added
>the 869 axioms from the SUMO 1.55 text file to
>the UBL-invoice protege ontology as "PAL-CONSTRAINTS".
>They can be viewed in the Protege files:
> ftp://micra.com/ontolog/UBLinv017.pprj
> ftp://micra.com/ontolog/UBLinv017.pont
> ftp://micra.com/ontolog/UBLinv017.pins
>
>To see the axioms, one goes to the "instances"
>window and selects :PAL-CONSTRAINT
> (:SYSTEM-CLASS ->:CONSTRAINT ->:PAL-CONSTRAINT)
>This merely serves to record the axioms where
>they can be viewed and recovered, e.g. by
>translation into KIF or any other first-order
>logic notation.
>---------------
>
>(2) At this point I am mostly interested in finding
>the basic concepts that UBL uses and recording them
>in Protege as a means of formalizing them in an
>ontology. The ultimate format for actual implementation
>in a program can be any logical system. The question
>of axioms is dealt with here merely to answer a question
>that has been raised about the usefulness of Protege.
> I would still like to discuss the meanings of the
>Basic Core Concepts with anyone who has some
>understanding of their intended meanings.
> The Ontolog project as I interpret it might
>be summarized:
> I. grok the UBL knowledge base
> II. convert or add it to an ontology that can
> be used in applications
>
> The problem is that data on the UBL concepts
>are distributed in several files, so that to get
>a complete understanding of them (to "grok" them)
>I think it is useful to try to organize all of
>the information in one window -- which is what
>protege is good at.
> As for the form of the ontology that can be
>used in applications -- we will know that when
>we actually have access to a business application
>that can use an ontology.
>
>------------------------------------
>
>(3) The axioms help add detail to the meanings of
>the various concepts, most importantly the relations.
>Those axioms which help define a particular
>relation (slot) have been added to a special
>:AXIOMS pane in the slot window. Those axioms
>that help define class concepts are referred to in
>the "Constraints" pane of the class window. If one
>selects the class "Region", for example (Physical->
>Object->Region) one sees "SUMAX-61" in the
>Constraints pane. Select that constraint, then
>click on the "V" button above the Constraints
>pane, and the constraint instance window will pop up.
>At this point, the formatting of most of the
>constraints may be confusing. I will have to
>correct that if anyone thinks it is worth the effort.
>
> But these axioms in Protege have only been
>attached in most cases to one concept -- class
>or slot. To see all axioms that mention some
>particular class or slot, one would want to use
>the SUMO ontology browser for that particular
>class or slot.
>
>--------------------------------------------
>(4) If we decide to add additional axioms for
>the UBL ontology, it would be best to name them
>differently, e.g. "UBLaxiom-001". Then they can
>be automatically extracted and added to the KIF file,
>which already contains the SUMO axioms.
>
>---------------------------------------
>
> I'll be away on vacation for a couple of weeks and
>will try to find some time to do more when I return.
>
> Pat
>
>=============================================
>Patrick Cassidy
>
>MICRA, Inc. || (908) 561-3416
>735 Belvidere Ave. || (908) 668-5252 (if no answer)
>Plainfield, NJ 07062-2054 || (908) 668-5904 (fax)
>
>internet: cassidy@xxxxxxxxx
>=============================================
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>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 (05)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (06)
|