Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontolgizing rain & snow [was: Track 1&2 Joint Missio

["Rich Cooper" <rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Doug,

 

Thanks for clarifying that point about MicroTheories ó Context. 

 

Your description of what exactly is in a microtheory sounds like a fruitful thing to study.  You gave a reference to your book

 

See my chapter on Cyc in <u>Theory and Applications of Ontology. Volume II</u>
for details of the microtheory system and a number of different types of microtheories
(Vocabulary, Theory, Data, Hypothetical, ...).

 

Is there a URL to the book which you would recommend, or to papers that abstract points in the book?  In particular, I would like to know how microtheories are comprised; understand the mapping from observations to “active microtheory (?)”, and understand how the inheritance network is traversed during discourse to get to the active one. 

 

Thanks,

-Rich

 

Sincerely,

Rich Cooper

EnglishLogicKernel.com

Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com

9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2

---

From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of doug foxvog
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 9:40 PM
To: '[ontolog-forum] '
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontolgizing rain & snow [was: Track 1&2 Joint Mission and Session Abstracts]

 

COn 26-Jan-12 5:49 PM, Rich Cooper wrote:

Dear Doug,

Its interesting to see the many contexts for which

Cyc has built infrastructure.  A couple of days

ago, there was a post sequence on the Siri patent

which described "active ontology" as though it

were one ontology from a library of ontologies.

>From a quick review of the patent, it seems they

consider the "active ontology" to be the one which

best fits the situation at hand.  

Since you are an accomplished expert on Cyc, can

you enlighten the rest of us about whether Cyc

uses the same or a similar concept, perhaps

calling it something else than the "active

ontology"?

Cyc has set up a large set of contexts, which they call microtheories, to separate its
definitions, theories, and data by topic.   These microtheories are in an inheritance
hierarchy such that topics that rely on other topics have the corresponding topics
as #$genlMts.  To reason about a certain set of data, one would normally create a
#$DataMicrotheory and specify its closest #$genlMts.  All the statements from the
#$genlMts and <i>their</i>#$genlMts are inherited (with provision for defining
 exceptions to various rules).  The microtheory in which a question is asked would
correspond to SIRI's "active ontology".

See my chapter on Cyc in  <u>Theory and Applications of Ontology. Volume II</u>
for details of the microtheory system and a number of different types of microtheories
(Vocabulary, Theory, Data, Hypothetical, ...). 

At least by the time i left Cycorp (in 2003), there were few statements encoded in CycL
that provided meta-information about what the microthories's topics were and what
they were designed to be used for.  Many terms had their #$definingMt specified, which
meant that reasoning about them should not be done unless the specified microtheory
was included in the mass of #$genlMts of the query microtheory.  This restriction was
not code-enforced by the end of 2003.

I did not read the patent, but from the discussions in this forum, am led to understand
that they have a set of rules for selecting the contexts (which they call ontologies) to use
in solving a question.   There had been discussion in Cycorp about doing such a thing,
utilizing both the #$definingMt assertions and other meta-assertions about the microtheories,
but i have seen no design work towards such a goal.

SIRI's technique for selecting an "active ontology" might be novel.  The idea of determining
an ontology in which to ask a question is not.

I hope this helps.

-- doug

Descriptions appreciated,

-Rich

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 doug foxvog

Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 2:04 PM

To: [ontolog-forum]

Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Ontolgizing rain &

snow [was: Track 1&2 Joint Mission and Session

Abstracts]

Being under heavy rain bombardment for several

days, a rare process in

our parts, the atmospheric condition demands

more attention.

Doug,

What about methane rain, neon rain, sulfuric

acid rain, iron rain,

volcanic ash rain, or rain dust, full of

chemicals, minerals and silt,

we have here,

in the Med Area, each early springtime from

North Africa.

Cyc has not modeled extra-terrestrial rain, but it

would be done similarly.

Their terms for rain refer to water rain.

They do have AcidRainProcess as a specialization

of RainProcess, and

have modeled Chemistry at the level of an

introductory college class

(actually: modelling the content of an AP

chemistry text -- for those

familiar with the US high school system).

The ontology has classes and relations for

representing material disolved

or suspended in rainwater.

And how to formally represent the

precipitation/downfall/rain properties:

types and forms, material and composition,

duration and intensity, speed

and noise, quantity and quality, products and

results, or causes and

effects ...

These are all basic concepts that have been well

thought out and

ontologized at the generic level in Cyc.  I only

have a copy of OpenCyc

on my computer, so don't have access to any rules

Cycorp may have

generated inter-relating such things .

Durations are specified as (#$MinutesDuration N)

[or another resolution];

downfall intensity can represented as (#$PerFn

(#$Centi #$Meter)

#$HoursDuration); and wind speed in some

#$UnitOfSpeed.

For causality, #$causes-SitSit would relate the

event of the storm (a

#$PhysicalEvent which is a type of #$Situation)

with a #$Situation which

it has caused.  To  state that the storm caused

some proposition to be

true, one would use (#$causes-ThingProp

BlizzardOf2012 <proposition>).

It looks any seasonal falling to the planet of

any form of material refers

to precipitation, as downfall of any from of

substance, rock, glass,

water, etc.

Cyc's #$PrecipitationProcess allows for such

specializations of precipitation

to be defined and reasoned about.  Even without

creating new terms,

you could refer to #$PrecipitationParticles which

are #$composedOf

(#$SolutionFn (#$LiquidFn #$Water)

#$HydrogenChloride), or one in

which they are #$Suspensions with the

#$suspendingFluid being one

substance and with #$suspendedParts being some

other substance, such

as a (#$MobFn #$SandParticle)s.

It appears that they don't have a term for

#$VolcanicAsh

Azamat

----- Original Message -----

From: "doug foxvog" <doug@xxxxxxxxxx>

To: <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 8:11 PM

Subject: [ontolog-forum] Ontolgizing rain & snow

[was: Track 1&2 Joint

Mission and Session Abstracts]

[ Also sent to ontology-summit discussion group.

]

Matthew West wrote:

I understand your view. How shall you handle

rain and snow?

Rain & snow refer to physical precipitation

particles, the precipitation

in

bulk, the process that produces the

precipitation, storms as events, and

storms as objects.

Cyc's representation of these different, but

related things (leaving out

comments and some additional statements)

includes:

(isa PrecipitationParticle ExistingObjectType)

(genls PrecipitationParticle Particle)

(genls PrecipitationParticle

InanimateObject-Natural)

(isa RainProcess ProcessType)

(genls RainProcess PrecipitationProcess)

(isa SnowProcess ProcessType)

(genls SnowProcess PrecipitationProcess)

(isa Rainwater ExistingStuffType)

(genls Rainwater (LiquidFn Water-Fresh))

(isa SnowMob ExistingStuffType)

(genls SnowMob (SolidFn Water))

(isa Snowflake ExistingObjectType)

(genls Snowflake PrecipitationParticle)

(genls (MobFn Snowflake) SnowMob)

(isa Raindrop ExistingObjectType)

(genls Raindrop PrecipitationParticle)

(genls Raindrop Rainwater)

(relationAllExists outputsGenerated

PrecipitationProcess

                         (MobFn

PrecipitationParticle))

(relationAllExists outputsGenerated RainProcess

(MobFn Raindrop))

(relationAllExists outputsGenerated SnowProcess

(MobFn Snowflake))

(isa StormAsObject ExistingObjectType)

(genls StormAsObject InanimateObject-Natural)

(relationAllExists physicalParts StormAsObject

CloudInSky)

(isa RainStormAsObject ExistingObjectType)

(genls RainStormAsObject StormAsObject)

(relationAllExists physicalParts StormAsObject

CloudInSky)

(relationAllExists physicalParts StormAsObject

(MobFn Raindrop))

(isa SnowStormAsObject ExistingObjectType)

(genls SnowStormAsObject StormAsObject)

(relationAllExists physicalParts StormAsObject

CloudInSky)

(relationAllExists physicalParts

SnowStormAsObject (MobFn Snowflake))

(not (relationExistsAll doneBy

PrecipitationProcess StormAsObject))

(comment

  (not (relationExistsAll doneBy

PrecipitationProcess StormAsObject))

  "A StormAsObject would include Duststorms,

which don't (necessarily)

include precipitation.")

(relationExistsAll doneBy RainProcess

RainStormAsObject)

(relationExistsAll doneBy SnowProcess

SnowStormAsObject)

(isa StormAsEvent ExistingObjectType)

(genls StormAsEvent ImmediateWeatherProcess)

(isa RainStormAsEvent ExistingObjectType)

(genls RainStormAsEvent StormAsEvent)

(relationAllExists subprocesses RainStormAsEvent

RainProcess)

(relationAllExists doneBy RainStormAsEvent

RainStormAsObject)

(isa SnowStormAsEvent ExistingObjectType)

(genls SnowStormAsEvent StormAsEvent)

(relationAllExists subprocesses SnowStormAsEvent

SnowProcess)

(relationAllExists doneBy SnowStormAsEvent

SnowStormAsObject)

(isa SnowStormAsObject ExistingObjectType)

(genls SnowStormAsObject StormAsObject)

(relationAllExists physicalParts

SnowStormAsObject (MobFn Snowflake))

Jack

On Jan 26, 2012, at 6:09 AM, Matthew West

wrote:

The main problem here is one of different

people using terms

differently. Hardly an ontological problem per

se, but certainly a

problem that causes confusion in developing

ontologies.

This is always a problem for ontologists.  The

different meanings have

to be teased apart.

Interestingly as a 4 dimensionalist I don't

recognise endurants at all,

but I do recognise activities, physical

objects, and participants.

Under

this world view all individuals (including

activities, physical objects

and participants) are spatiotemporal extents,

and you discover that an

activity consists of its participants, where a

participant is the state

of a physical object that participates in some

activity. So I recognise

the things you talk about. However, I would

assign the term "system" to

the physical object the participant is a state

of.

I would not restrict the term "system" merely to

physical objects.  But

having multiple clearly defined concepts which

different people use that

word

for in different contexts, is fine.  They just

need different URIs.

-- doug

Regards

Matthew West

Information  Junction

Tel: +44 1489 880185

Mobile: +44 750 3385279

Skype: dr.matthew.west

matthew.west@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://www.informationjunction.co.uk/

http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/

This email originates from Information

Junction Ltd. Registered in

England and Wales No. 6632177.

Registered office: 2 Brookside, Meadow Way,

Letchworth Garden City,

Hertfordshire, SG6 3JE.

...

__________________________________________________

_______________

Msg Archives:

http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/

Subscribe/Config:

http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-

summit/

Unsubscribe:

mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Community Files:

http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit20

12/

Community Wiki:

http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySu

mmit2012

Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/

__________________________________________________

_______________

Message Archives:

http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/

Config Subscr:

http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-f

orum/

Unsubscribe:

 

\

_________________________________________________________________
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)