[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Semantic Systems

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Adrian Walker <adriandwalker@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 15:30:51 -0400
Message-id: <1e89d6a40906261230u37f4e642qe5bb067cf865e2a4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hi John ---

You wrote

I am giving a 3-hour tutorial on CNLs next month, and
I'll mention your system
[Internet Business Logic] as an example.

Thanks.  Much appreciated. 

However, please note that the vocabulary for executable English is uncontrolled, and so largely is the syntax.

For example, one can write in a style like this [1]

the Reengineering company does business in some-zone
each international zone of Reengineering has some-dept
in that-zone the Reengineering company has a dept that-dept

(without any prior dictionary of grammar work) or in a style like this [2]

some-c1 is an instance_of some-C1 at some-t
some-c is a part_of that-c1 at that-t
(E c1) [ that-C1 c1 that-t and that-c part_of c1 at that-t ]

and so on.

Of course, one can also use the system to answer questions about controlled vocabularies.

                            Cheers,  -- Adrian

[1]  www.reengineeringllc.com/demo_agents/Reengineering.agent

[2]  www.reengineeringllc.com/demo_agents/RelBioOntDefn3.agent

Internet Business Logic
A Wiki and SOA Endpoint for Executable Open Vocabulary English over SQL and RDF
Online at www.reengineeringllc.com    Shared use is free

Adrian Walker

On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 2:39 PM, John F. Sowa <sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

AW> Would you include English semantics under "Semantic Systems"?

Unrestricted English semantics is still a research area.  It is
not in the current range of semantic tools that people have
been developing.

AW> If so the paper [1] may be of interest, as would be Attempto
 > and your work in this area.
Those are controlled languages that can be read "as if" they were
English, but their semantics is defined by the axioms that are
stated in their notations.  (Although there are semi-automated
tools that extract info from unrestricted English as an aid to
writing ontologies and formal specifications.)

I realize that you don't like to call your "Executable English"
a controlled NL.  But the semantics of the assertions made in
your system are *identical* to the semantics of equivalent
statements made in Attempto or any other controlled NL.

AW> [1] describes the only online system I know of that integrates
 > the meanings of: English, formal spec for an inference engine,
 > (meta)data, and automatically generated and executed SQL, with
 > English explanations of results.

Those are the kinds of actions that are supported by controlled NLs.
Some of them do indeed generate explanations (i.e., deduction steps)
that are expressed in the same language (CNL) used for input.
You should ask Norbert Fuchs, who ran the recent workshop on CNLs.

But in any case, I have always recommended that you would get more
publicity by advertising it as a CNL.  Making claims that you have
implemented unrestricted English just invites people to dismiss
you as a crank.

In any case, I am giving a 3-hour tutorial on CNLs next month, and
I'll mention your system as an example.

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    (01)

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