Rich -- (01)
Would it be fair to say that part of the USPTO "mess" -- exacerbated by
sheer volume of patents -- is that the meaning expressed in the
processes of research, writing, and evaluation of patents is not
formalized? One result appears to be that the huge effort devoted to
those attempts at precise representation of terms, precise
representation of functionality (including representations of similar
functionality), and precise representation of chains of influence in
natural language is wasted. There is much less benefit to all subsequent
patent-seekers than there should be. (02)
IMHO, attempting to address the superabundance of unstructured
information by using ontologies to federate resources and improve access
to that information results in necessary but marginal improvements. We
need to rethink the problem as a whole. There is, in fact, much less
knowledge than information. We cannot ignore that fact. (03)
Phil Murray (04)
Rich Cooper wrote:
>
> Dear John,
>
> You wrote below:
>
> If we want to move beyond discussions, we will have to show how we can
> solve real problems. But that requires us to analyze real problems.
>
> Where can we find some actual examples of those messy problems that
> the owners would let us examine in public?
>
> The USPTO patent database provides access to highly edited, debated,
> analyzed and valuable documents available to every researcher for
> free. Access is free, documents are free, search engine is free, and
> the format of the database comprises structured columns (e.g., patent
> number, date filed, first named inventor, title, and so forth.
> Unstructured text columns include the abstract (limited to one
> paragraph), claim tree, figures, and description among other columns
> of natural language usage in a pristine setting.
>
> -Rich
>
> John
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Rich Cooper
>
> EnglishLogicKernel.com
>
> Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com
>
> 9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John F. Sowa
> Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2011 2:58 PM
> To: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Some Grand Challenge proposal ironies
>
> On 10/26/2011 5:03 PM, Cory Casanave wrote:
>
> > An area of interest to me and many of our clients is solving
>
> > the information federation problem.
>
> That is indeed a very important problem. But people have been talking
>
> about that problem since the 1970s. That problem has many very thorny
>
> issues. But most of the so-called "use cases" abstract away all the
>
> thorns by stating some little toy problems.
>
> > Federated data is inherently distributed, uncoordinated, messy and
>
> > conflicting - yet there is value in leveraging these disparate data
>
> > resources in a more unified way
>
> I agree. I realize that dealing with a full scale problem that some
>
> large corporation really needs to solve is very difficult. But you
>
> can't solve a problem that is "inherently distributed, uncoordinated,
>
> messy and conflicting" by just looking at little snippets.
>
> Unfortunately, anybody who has large amounts of messy data will
>
> usually be reluctant to release it to public scrutiny because it
>
> inevitably contains trade secrets or other confidential material.
>
> > Discussions of this problem that involve, for example, the OWL,
>
> > Linked Data and Common Logic communities result in theoretical
>
> > and sometimes religious wars that can and have frightened
>
> > potential consumers of the technology away.
>
> If we want to move beyond discussions, we will have to show how
>
> we can solve real problems. But that requires us to analyze
>
> real problems.
>
> Where can we find some actual examples of those messy problems
>
> that the owners would let us examine in public?
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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
> (05)
--
--------------------- (06)
The Semantic Advantage
Turning Information into Assets
phil.murray@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
401-247-7899 (07)
Blog: http://semanticadvantage.wordpress.com
Web site: http://www.semanticadvantage.com (08)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (09)
|