ontolog-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Accommodating legacy software

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "doug foxvog" <doug@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 01:08:32 -0400
Message-id: <2d8477dbf5fb60486f6aee387aef5c4f.squirrel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Wed, September 5, 2012 09:29, William Frank wrote:    (01)

> would the following be a gloss applied to the between example:    (02)

> there is a betweeness relation B with respect to the less than relation
> among integers,    (03)

This is valid for the example using integers because there exists an
absolute ordering relation on integers that applies to the examples i gave.    (04)

> in which integers play three roles: the between integer; the below
> integer,
> and the above integer.    (05)

This assumes that the second argument must be the below integer
and the third argument the above integer.  If i gave the example:
  (and
    (between 10 5 11)
    (between 10 11 9) )
this mapping would not apply.    (06)

> and there is an instance of this relation, b, such that in that instance    (07)

> 5 is the below integer in b
> 11 is the above integer in b.
> 10 is the between integer in b,    (08)

> ?    (09)

Yes, this gloss is a valid way for expressing in 4 triples what i
expressed in one quad.    (010)


If i gave an example without a pre-existing default ordering
relation, e.g. with spatial betweeness, i'm not sure how you
would identify two different roles for arguments 2 and 3:    (011)

(between GoldenGateBridge SanFranciscoBay PacificOcean)    (012)

Betweenness could be non-spatial as well:    (013)

(between ModeratePoliticalPhilosophy ConservativePoliticalPhilosophy
              ProgressivePoliticalPhilosophy)    (014)

Again, assigning two different roles to arguments 2 and 3
is problematic.    (015)

-- doug foxvog    (016)

> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Andries van Renssen <
> andries.vanrenssen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Doug and Kingsley,
>>
>> In any relation (of any arity) the related things play roles of
>> different
>> kinds that are specific for the kind of relation.
>> The semantics of the kind of relation depends on the roles that the
>> related
>> things play in the relation.
>> An explicit specification of roles is required to define the semantics.
>> This
>> is independent of the sequence of arguments in an expression.
>> If you don't make those roles explicit, then you have find an
>> alternative,
>> such as the sequence of the arguments (as in <is between on path>).
>> Their
>> sequence becomes a pseudo specification of the kinds of roles in the
>> definition of the meaning of the relation.
>> Furthermore, the inverse expression has a different sequence of
>> arguments,
>> and is also a valid expression of the same fact.
>> Therefore, semantically it is purer to explicitly specify the kinds of
>> roles.
>>
>> Therefore, a basic semantic structure for the expressions of facts could
>> be:
>> * kind of relation - kind of role - related thing
>> For an n-ary relation you need n such expressions.
>>
>> The form
>> * related thing - kind of relation - related thing
>> is just a short cut for a pair of such expressions, in which the kinds
>> of
>> roles are assumed to be known from the definition of the kinds of
>> relation.
>> This short cut is only suitable for binary relations and needs a
>> mechanism
>> to determine which role is played by the left hand thing and right hand
>> thing respectively.
>>
>> A semantic model of the definition of a kind of relation requires even
>> more
>> detailed relations.
>> Such a model requires the specification of which kinds of roles are
>> required
>> by which kind of relation and which kinds of things may play such a
>> role.
>> This implies expressions such as:
>> * kind of relation - required played - kind of role
>> * kind of role - required player - kind of thing
>>
>> Note that the individual relations and roles are not yet explicit in
>> these
>> expressions. The basic semantic structures that I developed includes
>> also
>> the individual roles and relations and allows for the short cut
>> expressions
>> (see http://www.gellish.net/topics/semantic-modelling.html).
>>
>> Each of these triples requires the expression of auxiliary facts, such
>> as
>> their intention (illocutionary force), author, dates, context, etc.
>> In my view it is therefore not a question whether facts can be expressed
>> in
>> triples, but whether triples are a suitable structure when we in
>> practice
>> always model in collections of triples.
>>
>> The Gellish Data Table is a universal structure for all these kinds of
>> expressions, including the expression of auxiliary facts. That table is
>> an
>> alternative to RDF (with some creativity it can be converted into
>> collections of triples if you like). It is described in the document
>> "Definition of Universal Semantic Databases and Data Exchange Messages"
>> on
>> http://www.gellish.net/downloads/category/2-english.html.
>>
>> Andries
>>
>>
>> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
>> Van: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Namens doug foxvog
>> Verzonden: woensdag 5 september 2012 6:02
>> Aan: [ontolog-forum]
>> Onderwerp: Re: [ontolog-forum] Accommodating legacy software
>>
>> On Tue, September 4, 2012 17:02, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>> > On 9/4/12 3:41 PM, doug foxvog wrote:
>> >> On Tue, September 4, 2012 12:34, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>> ...
>>
>> >>> I believe Data denotes Subject Observation.
>> >>> I believe all observations are comprised of:
>> >>> 1. a subject
>> >>> 2. subject attributes
>> >>> 3. subject attribute values.
>>
>> ...
>> >> One common type of observation is that A is between B and C.
>> >> How would you express this with a single triple?    8)#
>>
>> > I would state that A is between B. A is Between C. Then I would define
>> > the semantics of  the  'Between' predicate  .
>>
>> !??
>> Let's explore this:
>>   (and
>>      (between   10 5 11)
>>      (between   10 4 11)
>>      (between   10 6 11)
>>      (between   10 7 11))
>> Using the KI translator this becomes:
>>   AND
>>     10 is between 5
>>     10 is between 11
>>     10 is between 4
>>     10 is between 11
>>     10 is between 6
>>     10 is between 11
>>     10 is between 7
>>     10 is between 11.
>>
>> What semantics does the between predicate have?
>>
>> How about the quaternary predicate, isBetweenOnPath?
>> Can you express the following with triples:
>>
>> (and
>>   (isBetweenOnPath WashingtonDC Maryland Virginia I95)
>>   (not (isBetweenOnPath WashingtonDC Maryland Virginia I495)))
>>
>>
>> -- doug foxvog
>> ...
>> >
>> > Kingsley
>> >>
>> >> -- doug foxvog
>>
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> William Frank
>
> 413/376-8167
>
>
> This email is confidential and proprietary, intended for its addressees
> only.
> It may not be distributed to non-addressees, nor its contents divulged,
> without the permission of the sender.
>    (017)



_________________________________________________________________
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    (018)

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