Sincerely,
Rich Cooper
EnglishLogicKernel.com
Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT
com
John Bottoms
wrote:
JB> My understanding of
categories consists of the following:
(domain == professional discipline or
context across time
or across a number of contributors)
RC> If this is a continuation
of the Semantic Systems thread (?), then some of the emails we have been
seeing about "Measures" might be relevant to distinguishing individuals from
groups. If we need a Property (Measure), we need to collect specimen
individuals using that Measure before we can categorize the individuals or the
group in any way.
But it still seems necessary to have a
"window function" ("membership predicate?") that will distinguish A from Not A
specimens based on the Value of the measured Property, thus creating the first
Category - A.
Every Category requires a Predicate, so
that must be next.
After that, I concede that Conjunction
be canonized into the ontogeny.
JB>
1. Quantification of an environment can
be accomplished
using
categories.
2. The domain is determined by a boundary
and the ideal
quantification process
divides the domain efficiently.
3. The metric for the effectiveness
quantification is the
coverage of the
domain. However, this may also
include metrics that
include more functionally useful
components such as
means.
My question is related to the effective
coverage and is, in
part, derived from the criticism of the
DIKW (or any other
pyramid) of the abstractions of
knowledge.
Q: "Should it be possible to replace the
existing approach to
categories with
an approach that extracts measured concepts
from meanings
and then performs cluster analysis on those
concepts"?
RC> Yes. For one example,
see:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=7209923.PN.&OS=PN/7209923&RS=PN/7209923
JB>
Rational:
a.) One of the weakness of the category
concept is that they
are designed for
coverage fo a domain for which the boundary
may be poorly
ascribed or poorly understood. e.g. we have
seen
redefinition of "I.Q" to include spatial and
musical
components.
b.) Next, domain boundaries change across
time and new categories
may need to be
added; for those changes the new entities must
be vetted. This
could be done using cluster analysis.
c.) Finally, the redefinition of the
process for determining
categories could
be automated and because the process relies
on a set of
meanings rather than a set of categories, it is
easier to
perform vetting on the meanings.
RC> John that last point isn't clear
to me at all, but all the preceding sounds like a great start on reviewing
identification and categorization processes.
-John
Bottoms
FirstStar
Concord, MA
T:
978-505-9878