Hi John. (01)
On Dec 17, 2007, at 22:44 , John F. Sowa wrote: (02)
> Bill,
>
> There is another principle: If you start with contrived axioms,
> you're likely to get contrived results:
>
>> (forall ((x person)) (exists (y) (and (has x y) (not (part y
>> EmpireStateBuilding))))))
>>
>> True when every person has something that isn't part of the Empire
>> State Building. The function introduced in the form you suggest
>> would
>> look pretty contrived -- or at least not so natural as 'fatherOf'.
>
> I can't imagine why anyone would put that axiom into a knowledge
> base that was supposed to serve some useful purpose. (03)
Well, I admit it was contrived. You got me. How about this one, then? (04)
(forall ((x human)) (exists ((y human_arm)) (part x y))) (05)
which also violates, for anatomically normal humans, uniqueness. I
believe that the U-Wash Foundational Model of Anatomy (FMA), which is
meant to be a normative model of human anatomy, contains many such
axioms. (06)
> Can you find any useful axioms of the A-E form whose Skolem functions
> would be "contrived"? (07)
I think I just did ;-D (08)
Bill Andersen (andersen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Ontology Works, Inc. (www.ontologyworks.com)
3600 O'Donnell Street, Suite 600
Baltimore, MD 21224
Office: 410-675-1201
Cell: 443-858-6444 (09)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (010)
|