ontology-summit
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontology-summit] First Model Bench Challenge

To: Ontology Summit 2012 discussion <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Jack Ring <jring7@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 10:38:37 -0700
Message-id: <2F81DCD0-2A9A-403D-9D72-BD0432818D8E@xxxxxxxxx>
Doug, 
So much for 'some branches of computer ontology' but what about the other 95% 
of humans? 
Also, does your ["type of thing" or "class of thing"] indicate that you see 
these terms as semantically equivalent?     (01)

On May 2, 2012, at 10:21 AM, doug foxvog wrote:    (02)

> On Tue, May 1, 2012 18:59, Jack Ring wrote:
>> Now we are getting in deeper. RE: "trying to identify concepts and the
>> relationships between them" is
>> a relationship between two concepts also a concept?
> 
> Strangely, the word "concept" is used as jargon in some branches of
> computer ontology to mean "type of thing" or "class of thing".  So the
> relationship between two classes is not itself a class.
> 
> On the other hand, if you treat "concept" to mean "idea" or "mental
> construct", then a relationship between two mental constructs is
> also a mental construct.
> 
> So often we talk past each other and think that we disagree when
> we are merely misinterpreting what the other person is trying to
> convey.  That is to be expected in a forum like this, in which people
> come from different disciplines and often use jargon from their
> discipline which other people mis-understand as having a meaning
> from plain vanilla English.
> 
> -- doug f
> 
> 
>> On May 1, 2012, at 12:19 PM, Paul Brown wrote:
>> 
>>> I agree with Mike. At the end of the day we are trying to identify
>>> concepts and the relationships between them. Each of these nuances is a
>>> distinct concept, though each is often closely related to other
>>> concepts. In any given context (which is itself a concept - and Cory is
>>> right to harp on this) the goal is to understand which concepts and
>>> relationships are relevant and then ensure that in the conversations
>>> that occur within (or are related to) that context the vocabulary
>>> clearly and unambiguously identifies those concepts and relationships.
>>> 
>>>                             -- PCB
>>> 
>>> 
>******************************************************************************************
>>> Paul C. Brown
>>> Principal Software Architect
>>> TIBCO Software Inc.
>>> Email: pbrown@xxxxxxxxx               Mobile: 518-424-5360
>>> 
>>> "Total architecture is not a choice - it is a concession to reality."
>>> Visit  www.total-architecture.com
>>> Architecture Books:
>>> -- Succeeding With SOA: Realizing Business Value Through Total
>>> Architecture
>>> -- Implementing SOA: Total Architecture In Practice
>>> -- TIBCO Architecture Fundamentals
>>> 
>>> The SOA Manifesto: soa-manifesto.org
>>> 
>>> Read the TIBCO blog: www.thetibcoblog.com
>>> 
>******************************************************************************************
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Mike Bennett [mailto:mbennett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 3:11 PM
>>> To: steve.ray@xxxxxxxxxx; Ontology Summit 2012 discussion; 'Cory
>>> Casanave'
>>> Cc: simf-rfp@xxxxxxx; simfteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: RE: [ontology-summit] First Model Bench Challenge
>>> 
>>> I would tend to frame that in a slightly different way. We are talking
>>> about words and meanings, and it's clear from this example (and from
>>> some that we have been working on) that once you consider modeling
>>> meaningful concepts, there are not enough words to go around - natural
>>> language speakers use a lot of contextual stuff to disambiguate.
>>> 
>>> So there are more concepts than words. Marriage as a transition and as a
>>> state is (as has been noted) a not untypical example. Commitments and
>>> obligations in transactions are another example we are grappling with
>>> right now (the commitment when the deal is struck and the
>>> commitment/obligation/whatever that persists until the deal is settled).
>>> 
>>> To me it therefore makes more sense to speak not in terms of wanting to
>>> "model every interpretation of a concept" but rather "model every
>>> concept that a word may be used to represent" or "model every meaning of
>>> a word" or simply "model every concept" ... and then map these to the
>>> words.
>>> 
>>> That is to say, I think it is misleading to refer to words as though
>>> they are concepts. They are not. They are symbols.
>>> 
>>> And before anyone else says it, SBVR has a good formal treatment of the
>>> relationships between words and meanings, i.e. vocabulary / lexicon
>>> versus meaningful concepts.
>>> 
>>> For those who speak more than one language, the concept (the meaning) is
>>> what you hold in your mind while seeking for the word in the language
>>> you are interpreting into. For those who don't, the nearest thing I can
>>> think of is that "it's on the tip of my tongue" moment when you know
>>> what you want to say but not the words in which to say it. I don't know
>>> if that helps.
>>> 
>>> Best regards,
>>> 
>>> Mike
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Mike Bennett
>>> Head of Semantics and Standards
>>> EDM Council
>>> Tel: +44 20 7917 9522
>>> Cell: +44 7721 420 730
>>> www.edmcouncil.org
>>> Semantics Repository: www.hypercube.co.uk/edmcouncil
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> [mailto:ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Steve Ray
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 1:47 PM
>>> To: 'Ontology Summit 2012 discussion'; 'Cory Casanave'
>>> Cc: simf-rfp@xxxxxxx; simfteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] First Model Bench Challenge
>>> 
>>> I agree that the real value of this exercise is for us to dig as deep as
>>> we
>>> possibly can to model every conceivable interpretation of the concepts.
>>> This
>>> will give us a fantastic artifact for intercomparisons & round-robin
>>> exercises, as well as a great way to examine the different languages.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Steven R. Ray, Ph.D.
>>> Distinguished Research Fellow
>>> Carnegie Mellon University
>>> NASA Research Park
>>> Building 23 (MS 23-11)
>>> P.O. Box 1
>>> Moffett Field, CA 94305-0001
>>> Email:    steve.ray@xxxxxxxxxx
>>> Phone: (650) 587-3780
>>> Cell:      (202) 316-6481
>>> Skype: steverayconsulting
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> [mailto:ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Paul
>>> Brown
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 6:58 AM
>>> To: Cory Casanave; Ontology Summit 2012 discussion
>>> Cc: simf-rfp@xxxxxxx; simfteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] First Model Bench Challenge
>>> 
>>> A likely scenario drawn from this discussion is one in which one party
>>> views
>>> the marriage as the event while another party views the marriage as the
>>> state. They are never going to agree on a common definition, because
>>> each
>>> has its own concept. Yet these two concepts are definitely related: One
>>> marks the point of state transition that is part of the other's model.
>>> 
>>> I think this is illustrative of situations (pardon the double entendre)
>>> we
>>> are going to encounter in the real world!
>>> 
>>>                             -- PCB
>>> 
>>> ****************************************************************************
>>> **************
>>> Paul C. Brown
>>> Principal Software Architect
>>> TIBCO Software Inc.
>>> Email: pbrown@xxxxxxxxx               Mobile: 518-424-5360
>>> 
>>> "Total architecture is not a choice - it is a concession to reality."
>>> Visit  www.total-architecture.com
>>> Architecture Books:
>>> -- Succeeding With SOA: Realizing Business Value Through Total
>>> Architecture
>>> -- Implementing SOA: Total Architecture In Practice
>>> -- TIBCO Architecture Fundamentals
>>> 
>>> The SOA Manifesto: soa-manifesto.org
>>> 
>>> Read the TIBCO blog: www.thetibcoblog.com
>>> ****************************************************************************
>>> **************
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Cory Casanave [mailto:cory-c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 12:17 AM
>>> To: Ontology Summit 2012 discussion
>>> Cc: simfteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; simf-rfp@xxxxxxx
>>> Subject: RE: [ontology-summit] First Model Bench Challenge
>>> 
>>> I would agree - there are 2 concepts under the label "Marriage", a
>>> situation
>>> and an event. The intent of the example in the web page is the situation
>>> but
>>> you may well also represent the event for extra credit!
>>> -Cory
>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> [mailto:ontology-summit- bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Hans
>>>> Polzer
>>>> Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 9:55 PM
>>>> To: 'Ontology Summit 2012 discussion'
>>>> Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] First Model Bench Challenge
>>>> 
>>>> Isn't it both? Marriage is both a state transition (the rite that
>>>> signals the transition to a married state from an unmarried state),
>>>> and a steady state condition after the state transition occurs (as in
>>>> "their marriage has lasted for
>>>> 50 years"). The word "wedding" is often used to distinguish between
>>>> the state transition and the steady state condition, denoting the
>>>> former but not the latter (although common usage isn't always precise
>>>> on this point, as  in "wedded bliss").
>>>> 
>>>> Hans
>>>> 
>>>> Hans
>>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> [mailto:ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jack
>>>> Ring
>>>> Sent: Monday, April 30, 2012 8:44 PM
>>>> To: doug@xxxxxxxxxx; Ontology Summit 2012 discussion
>>>> Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] First Model Bench Challenge
>>>> 
>>>> ??
>>>> Marriage is a situation in which a couple BECOMES married.") On Apr
>>>> 30, 2012, at 1:39 PM, doug foxvog wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Marriage is a situation in which a couple is married.")
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>>> 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/OntologySummit2012/
>>>> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-
>>>> bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
>>>> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>>> 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/OntologySummit2012/
>>>> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-
>>>> bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
>>>> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>>> 
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> 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/OntologySummit2012/
>>> Community Wiki:
>>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
>>> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>>> 
>>> -----
>>> No virus found in this message.
>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>> Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2411/4971 - Release Date:
>>> 05/01/12
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> 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/OntologySummit2012/
>>> Community Wiki:
>>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
>>> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>>> 
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> 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/OntologySummit2012/
>>> Community Wiki:
>>> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
>>> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>> 
>> 
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> 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/OntologySummit2012/
>> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
>> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> 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/OntologySummit2012/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012  
> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/     (03)


_________________________________________________________________
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/OntologySummit2012/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012  
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/     (04)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>