ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] language ambiguity (was: Axiomatic ontology)

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: paola.dimaio@xxxxxxxxx
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 12:19:41 +0700
Message-id: <c09b00eb0802142119t13f789abw71d5e9be14615acc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
re. powerset, yes I have a seen a demo at ISWC in Busan Korea. The guy
dId a search for 'fda approved drugs' and in the retrieved list there
was also 'marijuana'
So we wondered if marijuana was approved, and when we clicked on it
said 'not approved'
'it also picks up negative instanes' said the guy. hehehe.. there is a
video somewhere on the web, unless they edited it out...    (01)

On 2/15/08, Rob Freeman <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The most ambitious effort I know of along the lines of using classical
> NLP to try and label the Web for meaning is the very trendy new Web
> startup Powerset:
>
> http://www.powerset.com
>
> As I recall they have got funding in the area of $10+ M to index the
> whole Web. They've bought rights to PARC's NLP technology.
>
> Are people here aware of that company?
>
> I have a soft spot for any NLP effort, but anyone who has seen my
> posts here will probably realize I think they have got the problem
> exactly the wrong way around. Instead of using NLP to help with
> search, I think they should be using something like search to fix NLP
> (and improve search at the same time.)
>
> But that's another story. The effort is interesting.
>
> -Rob
>
> On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 7:29 PM,  <matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Dear Pat,
> >
> > This looks somewhat similar to what I have seen from a couple of EC funded
> > research projects I was a reviewer for over the last several years. There
> is
> > no doubt that if you consider this sort of thing to be a tool for computer
> > assisted ontology development, then it can be very helpful, particularly
> > where we are talking about extracting brute facts. However, if you are
> > talking about more general ontology extraction, then of course the
> ontolgoy
> > produced is going to be no better than that of the document considered,
> and
> > there are the usual issues with ambiguity that computers usually struggle
> > with, especially using words with different senses in close proximity.
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Matthew West
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>    (02)


-- 
Paola Di Maio
School of IT
www.mfu.ac.th
*********************************************    (03)

_________________________________________________________________
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    (04)

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