[Top] [All Lists]

[ontolog-forum] if you cannot measure..

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: FERENC KOVACS <f.kovacs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 23:29:35 +0000 (GMT)
Message-id: <573896.45965.qm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Ravi wrote:
What were you trying for us to learn from the bio links, I went there but did you have a particular area of their success to show the readers?
That link shows you a machine translation of that web page into several languages, check out how silly such product can get. If someone believes that it makes sense or use, he has no idea of what QA and reality means.
Ravi wrote:
So what are the alternatives to Dewey or Ranganathan's classifications in terms of semantic understanding?

Before we had ontologies, we already had inventories of objects complete with properties and relations included in descriptions and definitions that were not harmonized. Then we had library classification systems and various numeric identifiers combined with verbal identifiers that were not harmonized either. Instead, you had a limited understanding of relations based on spatial features and logic operators. More importantly, linguistic knowledge and lexical knowledge were kept apart as dictionaries and encyclopedias. Reality however is best understood through visualization which is poorly represented by verbal identifiers. Mind you, that of all our senses it is the visual output that is practically non-existing as a symmetric response to sensory input. Therefore we usually look for ways to represent everything visually and find the ways to turn verbal components into some form of "tesselation" so that you can build images from verbal segments.

Trying to quote from my notes, here is what Wittgenstein says about the importance of images or pictures.

2.1 We create images for ourselves on facts

2.12 An image is a model of reality.

2.13 Objects are the elements of an image

2.14.1 An image is a fact

2.182 Every image is logical as well

3.The logical image of the facts is a thought

4.01 A statement is an image of reality ...

4.021 A statement is an image of reality. If I understand the statement, then I must be familiar with the condition described by the statement. And I understand the statement without explanation.

4.022 A statement reveals its sense

4.06 A statement may only be true or false by checking that if it is an image of reality or not.

And I can recall that another author who solved the issue of visualizing music wrote in his book:

Knowledge is ordered access to information Definition 63 on page 440

Principle 17 Visual navigation must be built on ordering

Visual navigation on general databases is difficult task for three reasons

The data structure is not a priori in a geometric shape.

The geometric shape, if it occurs, is not a priori adapted to human 3D vision

An object may be composed of other objects which in turn are composed and so on in a recursive way. Visualisation then should take care of a recursive architecture

All that lead me to believe that the alphabetical sort of words are an incorrect structure form knowledge representations, foundation level or otherwise. The practical use of the current organization of KRs that I find important is impossible from WordNet, because that does not carry the information that results from a different kind of semantic analysis, including mental operations, etc.


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>