[Top] [All Lists]

[ontology-summit] [ont-of-ont] Could we have some examples of Semi-Struc

To: Ontology Summit 2008 <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Michael Gruninger <gruninger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2008 11:10:49 -0400
Message-id: <4804C579.7020103@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
 From the chat session of 
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?ConferenceCall_2008_04_10    (01)

 > RexBrooks: For MichaelGruninger: Could we have some examples of 
 > Ontologies?   (1DPK)    (02)

Examples of semistructured ontologies include
Enterprise Ontology (Edinburgh) and OWL-S.    (03)

In each case, we need additional conditions (specified in natural language)
in order to fully capture the intended intepretation of terms in the
ontology.    (04)

For example, the following axiom from the Enterprise Ontology
(which uses old KIF syntax) is not completely equivalent to
the intended interpretation in the comment.    (05)

Intended-Purpose    (06)

(define-relation Intended-Purpose (?activity-spec ?soa)                 
"A Relationship between an Activity-Spec and a State-Of-Affairs whereby:
1. Execution of the Plan will result in fully or partially Achieving the 
State Of Affairs *and*
2. The State-Of-Affairs comprises one more of the Specified-Effects of the
Activity-Spec whose achievement is declared to be the primary reason(s)
for Executing the Activity-Spec.
An Activity-Spec with an Intended-Purpose is defined to be a Plan"
                (and (Activity-Spec ?activity-spec)
                        (State-Of-Affairs ?soa)
                        (Specified-Effect ?activity-spec ?soa))    (07)

Similarly, in the following definition from OWL-S, the intended semantics
discussed in the comment are not captured by the OWL axiom.    (08)

<owl:Class rdf:ID="Any-Order"> <rdfs:comment>     Allows the process 
components (specified as a bag) to be executed in some unspecified order 
but not concurrently. Execution and completion of all components is 
required. The execution of processes in an "Any-Order" construct cannot 
overlap, i.e.atomic processes cannot be executed concurrently and 
composite processes cannot be interleaved.
  <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#ControlConstruct"/>
      <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="#components"/>
      <owl:allValuesFrom rdf:resource="#ControlConstructBag"/>
      <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="#components"/>
</owl:Class>    (09)

This distinction is important since we cannot simply load the axioms
into an automated theorem prover and expect that the sentences that
are provable are equivalent to the sentences that are entailed by
the intended interpretation.
We also need to somehow incorporate the documentation into any
implementation.    (010)

- michael    (011)

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/OntologySummit2008/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2008 
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/    (012)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [ontology-summit] [ont-of-ont] Could we have some examples of Semi-Structured Ontologies? (1DPK), Michael Gruninger <=