ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Start thinking about the 2008 Ontology Summit

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "rick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <rick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 09:05:08 -0500
Message-id: <476D1994.7060300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
John, Steve & All:    (01)

Nice description of the role of CL.    (02)

At the summit, I'd like to see this scenario generalized into 
information flow and IFF.    (03)

John: Any chance Robert Kent would attend ?    (04)

John F. Sowa wrote:
> Pat,
> 
> There are two primary roles for CL:
> 
>   1. To serve as a target for translations to and from a wide
>      range of logic-based languages.
> 
>   2. To provide a model-theoretic semantics for any notation
>      that can be translated to CL (i.e., for any sentence s in
>      any language L, and for any model M, the truth value of s
>      in the model M shall be defined as the truth value in M
>      of the CL statement to which s is translated).
> 
>  > Do you have a list of the open-source reasoning engines that
>  > support any of the implementations of CL?
> 
> Any reasoning engine for any language that is translatable to CL
> is a reasoning engine for that subset of CL.
> 
> Therefore, every reasoning engine for plain vanilla FOL, for OWL,
> for Datalog, for any UML diagrams, etc., etc., etc., can be used
> as a reasoning engine for CL.
> 
> And I mean that point *very* seriously.  Different subsets of FOL
> can be supported by different reasoning engines with different
> levels of efficiency.  Therefore, many reasoning engines are
> actually implemented by a collection of specialized reasoning
> engines for different subsets.  That technique has some advantages:
> 
>   1. A syntactic test to determine which subset of FOL a particular
>      problem belongs to can be performed very rapidly -- usually in
>      time proportional to the length of the problem statement.
> 
>   2. But reasoning engines usually take more time, sometimes polynomial
>      time and sometimes even exponential time.
> 
>   3. Yet many important special cases can often be done very fast.
> 
> Therefore, it is useful to perform the syntactic check in order
> to determine which reasoning engine to use for a given problem.
> 
> The beauty of having a common semantics for a wide range of different
> dialects of logic is that a reasoning engine tailored to a dialect D1
> is guaranteed to produce the same results as a reasoning engine for a
> dialect D2 on any problem expressible in the intersection of D1 and D2.
> 
> Therefore, given a problem stated in any source dialect, syntactic
> checks can be used to choose the best reasoning engine for that
> problem -- independent of the dialect for which that reasoning
> engine was originally designed.
> 
> 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
>  
> 
>     (05)


_________________________________________________________________
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    (06)

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