To: | "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
---|---|
From: | "Azamat Abdoullaev" <abdoul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Date: | Tue, 24 Jul 2007 19:54:32 +0300 |
Message-id: | <00a301c7ce13$4f212060$030aa8c0@az00evbfog6nhh> |
John wrote:
''It is far *easier* to design systems to learn and
adapt to multiple
ontologies than to design a single universal ontology.'' ...That is a terrible assumption that is the cause
of our currently
inflexible, limited, fragile systems''. I intentionally made a biconditional statement:
a single global ontology (O) if and
only if powerful intelligent systems (I).
Or, O implies I as much as I implies O. Either
both true or both are false.
The stated rule ''O iff I'' can be validated by
empirical proving ''if O, then I'' and ''if I, then O''.
What we need to prove the hypothesis is
to build the Intelligent Web or the Universal Formal Ontology, any of
which at the same time both cause
and consequence.
Azamat
----- Original Message -----
From: "John F. Sowa" <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 12:36 AM
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Terminology Question
concerning WebArchitecture and LinkedData > > That is a terrible assumption that is the cause of our currently > inflexible, limited, fragile systems: > > > ''A common world model'', or a single global ontology, is a > > necessary and sufficient condition of powerful intelligent systems. > > It is definitely not necessary, and it is very, very, very far > from being sufficient. > > In fact, one of the major problems of traditional AI systems is > that they are brittle. And one of the major reasons for the > brittleness is that they can only work with one ontology and > they are incapable of dynamically learning and adapting to new > ontologies. > > If you want to make your systems flexible and powerful, you need > to make them able to learn and adapt to *any* ontology that might > be in use by any system they interoperate with. > > It is far *easier* to design systems to learn and adapt to multiple > ontologies than to design a single universal ontology. > > John > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/ > Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/ > Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/ > Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ > To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > _________________________________________________________________ Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/ Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/ Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/ Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (01) |
Previous by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Terminology Question concerning WebArchitecture and LinkedData, John F. Sowa |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Terminology Question concerning WebArchitecture and LinkedData, Azamat Abdoullaev |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Terminology Question concerning WebArchitecture and LinkedData, John F. Sowa |
Next by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] Terminology Question concerning WebArchitecture and LinkedData, dbedford |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |