[Top] [All Lists]

[ontolog-forum] if you cannot measure...

To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: FERENC KOVACS <f.kovacs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 13:18:59 +0000 (GMT)
Message-id: <204926.14098.qm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In the practical world of business, such as in car manufacturing, there are proven methods of giving account of multitudes as well as unary objects. Moreover, they have a way to assemble them with methods to measure the number of mistakes/faults/rejects made in the process which are crucial as feedback to improve the methods applied.

In the SW world created for the representation of knowledge people are more interested in magic than reality in the sense that the do not reveal the mental routes leading to the outcome. Knowledge representations are sorted morphologically, that is alphabetically, because that is the only sort key (order) mathematicians know besides numbers. This fallacy  is echoed in Kuhn's paper as well as by John Dewey.

The current theoretical approach to semantic analysis as used in AI or applied MT is certainly nothing to write home about, especially, if you look at the actual products in contrast to ambitions.
Biology is an experimental science and look what they get in other languages to share by using "theoretical sound scientific solutions, just because computing deals with numbers"

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>