ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] How determine the instances of this concept?

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "doug foxvog" <doug@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 10:48:14 -0400 (EDT)
Message-id: <61662.129.6.59.206.1317998894.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
I haven't seen this definition expressed in FOL yet (but i have not yet
read every post in this thread), so i'll to that below.    (01)

On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 12:55 AM, joel luis carbonera <
joelcarbonera@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:    (02)

> I'm modeling an ontology for the field of geology.
>
> Trying to represent the ontology in first order logic, considering the
> necessary and sufficient conditions for each concept, I have found some
> challenges regarding to a specific concept, called Sedimentary Facies.    (03)


> The current domain definition of Sedimentary facies is as follows:
> A Sedimentary facies is a amount of rock in a body of rock, visually
> distinguishable (through discontinuities of visual properties) of
> adjacent amounts of rock in the same body of rock.    (04)

> How can I formalize this concept in FOL?    (05)

In Cyc, you could express this as follows (with terms not defined
in OpenCyc marked by *):
(isa *SedimentaryFacies ExistingObjectType)
    ; A Sedimentary Fascies is a distinguishable amount of something
(isa *SedimentaryFacies SpatiallyDisjointObjectType)
    ; Two instances of Sedimentary Fascies do not overlap (implied)    (06)

(genls *SedimentaryFacies StoneStuff)
        ; A Sedimentary Fascies is an amount of rock
(genls *SedimentaryFacies SpatiallyContinuousThing)
        ; A Sedimentary Fascies is a single connected object (implied)    (07)

(genls *SedimentaryFacies *BodyOfRock)
        ; A Sedimentary Fascies is a body of rock (implicit in definition?)
(relationExistsAll externalParts *BodyOfRock SedimentaryFacies)
    ; Every Sedimentary Fascies is an external (since visible) part
    ; of some body of rock
; alternatively, if you don't want to define "body of rock":
    (relationExistsAll externalParts StoneStuff SedimentaryFacies)
    (relationExistsAll externalParts GeographicalThing SedimentaryFacies)
        ; A "body of rock" is a geographical thing, not an object in hand.
    (genls *SedimentaryFacies GeographicalThing)    (08)

; not stated: (genls *SedimentaryFacies SedimentaryRock)
    ; A Sedimentary Fascies is sedimentary rock    (09)


(relationAllExists connectedAlongSurface SedimentaryFacies StoneStuff)
    ; A Sedimentary Fascies has adjacent rock (connected along its surface)    (010)

    ; Rock adjacent to a Sedimentary Facies (which is not itself a
    ; Sedimentary Facies) is visually distinguishable through
    ; discontinuities of visual properties (i.e., has a different visual
    ; texture):
(implies
   (and
      (isa ?FASCIES *SedimentaryFacies)
      (connectedAlongSurface ?FASCIES ?ADJACENT_ROCK)
      (isa ?ADJACENT_ROCK StoneStuff)
      (not (isa ?ADJACENT_ROCK *SedimentaryFacies)))
   (*hasDifferentVisualTexture ?FASCIES ?ADJACENT_ROCK)))    (011)

All the terms except SedimentaryFacies and hasDifferentVisualTexture
are already defined in OpenCyc.  If you want to define a different
predicate than hasDifferentVisualTexture to use instead, fine.    (012)

-- doug    (013)

> Apparently, the instances of this concept are determined depending on
> each other, in a relative way. I'm not sure that I can logically
> determine what are the instances of the concept.
>
> Best regards.
>
> Joel Luis Carbonera    (014)


=============================================================
doug foxvog    doug@xxxxxxxxxx   http://ProgressiveAustin.org    (015)

"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.
=============================================================    (016)
read some of the material here, on fiat objects:


BS

On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 12:55 AM, joel luis carbonera <joelcarbonera@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'm modeling an ontology for the field of geology.

Trying to represent the ontology in first order logic, considering the necessary and sufficient conditions for each concept, I have found some challenges regarding to a specific concept, called Sedimentary Facies.

The current domain definition of Sedimentary facies is as follows:
A Sedimentary facies is a amount of rock in a body of rock, visually distinguishable (through discontinuities of visual properties) of adjacent amounts of rock in the same body of rock.

How can I formalize this concept in FOL?

Apparently, the instances of this concept are determined depending on each other, in a relative way. I'm not sure that I canlogically determine what are the instances of the concept.

Best regards.

Joel Luis Carbonera


_________________________________________________________________
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
 


_________________________________________________________________
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    (01)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>