On Thursday, February 19, 2009 8:09 AM, Patrick Cassidy wrote:
> John,
> You conclusion "if it can't be done by the Cyc group, it can't be done
> by
> anyone else" is absurd on its face. You have never yet produced a single
> detailed example of something that Cyc tried to do and failed, with
> specifics about the goal, effort expended, method used, and reason for
> failure. Anything less is useless anecdotal stories from which we learn
> nothing. (01)
Indeed.
Doug's dinner is hardly an ontology cooking of haute cuisine. Rather, it is
a concoction of disagreeable ingredients without a base of stock. The whole
stuff is made without a conceptual base, foundation ontology.
As I mentioned earlier, there are two very simple criteria to test the real
value of schemes, knowledge systems, languages, models, or ontologies;
namely, see how:
1.they treat the category of Thing or Entity;
2. they define the class of Relationships.
No need to go further down, taxing your mind. Here is an endless listing of
ontology projects, http://www-ksl.stanford.edu/kst/ontology-sources.html;
http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/mfkb/related.html, ongoing and past away, to
check up the rule. (02)
Take the CYC KB Pyramid, laregly reminding the Ponzi pyramid to entice
investors:
The top stuff is Thing, dubbed "universal collection". Now, look how it sees
the ontological distinctions between universals and particulars or
instances, classes and members, collections and individuals. Thing is
divided into Individual ("the collection of all things that are not
collections, abstract and concrete, include physical objects, events,
numbers, relations, and groups) and Intangible Thing ("things that are not
physical, including events..."). Individuals, concrete and abstract, and
intangible, as not having physical substance, are neither seperate classes
nor disjoint things. What are events, individuals or intangible things? I
wonder if anybody knowlegeable has ever reviewed this creation. (03)
Next, see how the relationship treated and defined. It is put among "sets"
and "collections"; and deprecated as "relationship is a mathematical
object". You may stop here and throw away the whole stuff. Whatever amount
of money you put in this schema, it will be consumed as matter and energy in
the black hole even without Hawking radiation. (04)
Bottom line:
the CYC failure shows one plain thing:
a strong need for standard or foundation ontology, to head off large-scale
knowledge engineering projects. Among other things, the priceless role of SO
will be in its capacity to filter out all sorts of conceptual impurities,
concocted models, false schemes, and nonsensical ontologies, like CYC.
Azamat Abdoullaev
http://www.eis.com.cy (05)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Patrick Cassidy" <pat@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "'[ontolog-forum] '" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 8:09 AM
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] standard ontology (06)
> John,
> You conclusion "if it can't be done by the Cyc group, it can't be done
> by
> anyone else" is absurd on its face. You have never yet produced a single
> detailed example of something that Cyc tried to do and failed, with
> specifics about the goal, effort expended, method used, and reason for
> failure. Anything less is useless anecdotal stories from which we learn
> nothing.
>
> Pat
>
> Patrick Cassidy
> MICRA, Inc.
> 908-561-3416
> cell: 908-565-4053
> cassidy@xxxxxxxxx
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-
>> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John F. Sowa
>> Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 12:24 AM
>> To: [ontolog-forum]
>> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] standard ontology
>>
>> Pat,
>>
>> Perhaps OpenCyc doesn't support all the software goodies you want.
>> But it has an enormous advantage over FO: it exists!
>>
>> PC> Can you point me to an application of OpenCyc (one that I can
>> > view and test with a browser or test after downloading and
>> > installing for free) that gives a good example of interoperability
>> > among programs created by two or more separate development groups?
>>
>> I don't know. But there is one thing that I do know for certain:
>> There is *zero* evidence that FO can be used for any such thing.
>>
>> If Cyc or OpenCyc cannot be used to support interoperability,
>> then that would make it extremely difficult to make any claims
>> that some nonexistent FO that isn't even defined would be better.
>>
>> PC> Where can I find the translator that takes a KB developed using
>> > SUMO and translates it into OpenCyc assertions? Is there a web
>> > site where we can test out the Cyc language understanding function?
>> > Can we modify modules of that program to see if a different approach
>> > will result in superior performance? If a commercial company wants
>> > to use the Cyc reasoning engine can they do it without paying
>> > royalties? Is there a set of separately developed databases
>> > integrated via OpenCyc that can be globally queried by either a
>> > web browser, or by downloading and installing? Are there a
>> > collaborative open-source projects to create applications using
>> > OpenCyc, open to contributions from any interested party, with
>> > the results freely usable?
>>
>> I don't know -- ask Lenat. But again, the answer for FO
>> to every one of those question is "definitely not".
>>
>> Bottom line: If it hasn't yet been done with Cyc or OpenCyc, that
>> is very strong evidence for *not* developing FO.
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>> Config Subscr: 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 join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
>> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Config Subscr: 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 join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> (07)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: 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 join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (08)
|