[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Distributed Knowledge?

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Len Yabloko" <lenya@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 13:15:32 +0000
Message-id: <W740481439174231224076532@webmail34>
Pat,    (01)

You answer makes clear how Semantic Web is supposed to operate. However, it 
seems to leave very important practical consideration outside of its scope.    (02)

SB>>     Alternatively, one might hypothesise that individuals may only  
>> pick up on the knowledge they need - use only the terms without  
>> further inference. That means that they have, to some extent,  
>> misunderstood the term.    (03)

I strongly agree. There are implicit assumptions behind any inference which are 
not part of any specification. If one wants to apply Semantic Web to a 
particular problem, then some of these assumptions must be evaluated with 
respect to the problem domain. Or are you suggesting that assumptions implicit 
in SW core meta-theory are never in conflict with any problem domain, as long 
as the problem defined in terms of the same meta-theory? In that case we are 
forced into Closed World Assumption which may not be practical for distributed 
knowledge.    (04)

PH>No. They can do as much inference or as little as they like. But their  
>not doing so does not imply that they are MISunderstanding anything.  
>They may need only a very limited set of valid conclusions to do their  
>job. That is not misunderstanding.    (05)

But what if one can not draw necessary conclusions to do the job - where do we 
go from here? Does SW offer any means for negotiating additional required 
knowledge to make further inferences?    (06)

SB>> This raises two questions; firstly, how can one quantify the level  
>> of misunderstanding? and secondly, how can one then determine if the  
>> level of misunderstanding is significant?
>>    (07)

I think that is the question of great practical significance. The "level of 
misunderstanding" can be replaced with more formal criteria based on specific 
conclusions that could not be made. Then some of initial assumptions can be 
revised and resulting "damage" assessed to answer the second question.    (08)

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    (09)

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