On Wed, May 25, 2011 1:04, John F. Sowa said:
> Duane, Leo, and Pat,
> I wish we had suitable tools that meet those requirements:
>> The context is an enterprise that must choose
>> one single knowledge interchange and persistence language to preserve
>> their ontological work. They require tooling (open source preferred) to
>> support visual modeling and taxonomy development based on the
>> work. The industry is military/international intelligence with an eye
>> towards context driven rule-sets and dynamic decision making based on
>> computational intelligence agents. It must be able to cross reference
>> symbols/terms in multiple languages and map them back to the concept,
>> noting the nuances between them.
> I mostly agree with the comments by Leo and Pat.
>> T marks reasoners/tools, though LOOM, now PowerLoom, has a KR language,
>> as does CYC in CycL, but these are dependent on using those tools. (01)
> CycL is the richest of all the KR languages, and it could express
> anything that any of the others can support. But the Cyc tools weren't
> designed to support "context driven rule-sets and dynamic decision
> making based on computational intelligence agents." (02)
Cyc does come close. Cyc is designed to support context driven rule
sets. As for dynamic decision making, code would have to be written
to interface Cyc with a dynamic I/O system. This has been done in
other cases. (03)
> It would be possible to express any of the ontology and KR information
> in Cyc, but there would be some serious questions about how the Cyc
> tools could be integrated with intelligent agents. In fact, that same
> question comes up with any or all of the KR languages on the list. (04)
>> At this stage in the development of knowledge representation methods,
>> it is likely that baby steps such as OWL will rapidly be superseded...
> OWL cannot begin to satisfy the requirements on Duane's list. It
> wasn't designed to handle agents or rules, much less "context driven
> rule sets" or "dynamic decision making".
> I'm sure that tools that meet the requirements listed above will be
> available within the next 5 years or so, but I don't know of COTS
> (Commercial Off-The-Shelf) software that can support them today. (05)
Something like this will probably require special coding for decades, imho.
But interfacing with COTS software is beneficial. (06)
-- doug foxvog (07)
> My recommendation is to use FactGuru (open source) to manage the
> English definitions of all the terminology. FG will also store
> and manage the formal definitions in any notation(s) that are
> used for the implementation. I don't believe that there is
> any single ideal notation that is available as COTS today.
> John (08)
doug foxvog doug@xxxxxxxxxx http://ProgressiveAustin.org (09)
"I speak as an American to the leaders of my own nation. The great
initiative in this war is ours. The initiative to stop it must be ours."
- Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
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 (011)