[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] formal systems, common logic and lbase

To: "[ontolog-forum] " <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Christopher Menzel <cmenzel@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2007 11:40:28 -0600
Message-id: <BB6C6CF6-65F9-4479-9968-80956EA2BD53@xxxxxxxx>
On Nov 22, 2007, at 9:38 AM, Pat Hayes wrote:
>> It think CL could be very useful as KR for  NLP applications
> OK, that wasn't clear from your earlier emails, which seemed (?) to
> be saying that CL *was* NLP.
> But why say CL instead of FOL? CL *is* FOL, after all.    (01)

Just for the record, since this comment of Pat's, meant to dispel any  
unclarity about the nature of CL as logic as opposed to NLP, might  
suggest that CL is nothing *but* a species of FOL: CL indeed  
encompasses FOL but, as Pat of course knows as well as anybody,  
because of the existence of CL dialects that include so-called  
"sequence markers" that (in a certain restricted sense) allow  
quantification over finite sequences of domain objects, CL also  
encompasses a class of logics that are equivalent in expressive power  
to weak infinitary logics, and these logics are provably more powerful  
than FOL.  (It can easily be shown, e.g., that compactness fails for  
these logics.)    (02)

For details see the CL spec.    (03)

-chris    (04)

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    (05)

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