HI Ali --
You wrote:
..a third way would be to get people to communicate directly with representations of models (examples), and map those into logic.
Sounds like inductive inference of logical clauses with variables from ground examples. Lots of research in that area (e.g. Progol [sic]), but are there any practical mapping systems? (Mapping by hand would be hopelessly error-prone, IMHO.)
Rich -- you wrote:
...since applications can be organized into similarity clusters, similar applications in the same cluster, there COULD be much more application-knowledgeable systems which understand the cluster, not the specific application until the designer explains it to the application-knowledgeable system.
At a rather low level, is that perhaps one of the things Java inheritance with override tries to do? The result seems to be huge libraries that themselves are hard to use.
At a higher level, ontologies at least try to get some common terminology into circulation, but then most of the manual work remains in actually writing an application using the terminology.
Cheers, -- Adrian
Internet Business Logic
A Wiki and SOA Endpoint for Executable Open Vocabulary English Q/A over SQL and RDF
Online at www.reengineeringllc.com
Shared use is free, and there are no advertisements
Adrian Walker
Reengineering
On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 4:18 PM, Ali Hashemi <ali@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Adrian, a third way would be to get people to communicate directly with representations of models (examples), and map those into logic.
Ian, I'm curious, is your gripe with Common Logic specifically or is it more along the lines of how Adrian substituted the more generic [logic] into your statement?
If the latter, I also don't see how FOL is inherently trickier than learning any given procedural programming language. Both require a certain perspective and background for one to become fluent in expressing themselves in. Admittedly, we have whole schools and courses dedicated from as early as high school to teaching people about procedural programming. Unfortunately, logic, especially the applied sort, only seems to get introduced if you're lucky at an undergraduate level, if not graduate. (A very few high schools do teach some variety of propositional logic, usually stuffed away inside a philosophy course...)
Note, all this isn't to say that interfaces aren't important (I really wish OOR or COLORE had a dedicated user interaction/ interface person/team) - but I'm not sure the problem is predominantly (let alone exclusively) due to the inherent trickiness of logic or the various interfaces.
Best, Ali On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Adrian Walker <adriandwalker@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Ian --
You wrote: If it [logic] weren't so awkward, more people might use it for commercial applications.
There seem to be two ways to go with this -- graphics, and natural language.
John Sowa can tell about the virtues of graphics in the form of Conceptual Graphs.
For lightweight natural language knowledge input and use, you may like to consider Executable English, as in
as a step towards energy independence, the US would like to reduce oil imports by some-number barrels per year
to convert from Quadrillion Btu to barrels of gasoline, multiply by some-factor
that-number / that-factor = some-quadrillion-btu
liquid fuel has an average price of some-amount in 2030 (2007 $ per Million Btu)
that-amount * 1000000000 = some-price-per-quadrillion-btu
those-quadrillion-btu * that-price-per-quadrillion-btu = some-total$
that-total$ / 1000000000 = some-total
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
as a step towards energy independence, the US would like to reduce the cost of oil imports by that-total billion 2007 $ by 2030
See also [1-4].
Anyone have a third way?
Cheers, -- Adrian
[1] http://www.reengineeringllc.com/Business_Rules_and_OMG_SBVR_Presentation.pdf
[2] http://www.reengineeringllc.com/A_Wiki_for_Business_Rules_in_Open_Vocabulary_Executable_English.pdf
[3] http://www.reengineeringllc.com/Oil_Industry_Supply_Chain_by_Kowalski_and_Walker.pdf
[4] Internet Business Logic
A Wiki and SOA Endpoint for Executable Open Vocabulary English Q/A over SQL and RDF
Online at www.reengineeringllc.com
Shared use is free, and there are no advertisements
Adrian Walker
ReengineeringOn Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 3:23 PM, Ian Bailey <ian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi John,
You wrote:
... people said "Oooh, FOL is too hard to learn."
Which is true. CL (pick any dialect you like) is difficult to work with. If
it weren't so awkward, more people might use it for commercial applications.
Until that day, people will work with more productive, intuitive notations,
that unfortunately are somewhat less formal - they still work, mind you.
Maybe the CL/FOL community need to employ some HCI folks to help them
develop the next generation of modelling notation, because what's there in
CL now just isn't going to cut it with the average developer or data
modeller.
Ian
-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John F. Sowa
Sent: 18 October 2010 19:46
To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Interpreting OWL
I agree with Ed's characterization of all the interrelationships
of the many, many notations. My short summary:
1. There are a huge number of ad hoc declarative notations, all
of which have only one thing in common: they are subsets
of first-order logic, usually with some special-purpose
built-in ontology and a methodology for using it.
2. For any two notations X and Y, it is often possible to find
a mapping of some subset of X to some subset of Y, but no
guarantee that the methodology and ontologies designed for X
are compatible with those of Y.
3. RDF is compatible with almost all of them because it is
a lowest-common-denominator subset of all of them.
4. But RDF has a bloated, unreadable notation that even its
designer (Tim Bray) disowned, and nearly everybody invents
some special-purpose way of saying or writing (A B C).
What got us into this mess is that people said "Oooh, FOL is
too hard to learn." So everybody invented a different notation
for writing some version of it, and nobody gave any thought
to how their version related to anybody else's.
For further commentary on these issues, see
http://www.jfsowa.com/talks/iss.pdf
Integrating Semantic Systems
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
_________________________________________________________________
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
-- www.reseed.cawww.pinkarmy.org(•`'·.¸(`'·.¸(•)¸.·'´)¸.·'´•) .,.,
_________________________________________________________________
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 (01)
|