ontology-summit
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontology-summit] Potential Tracks for Ontology Summit 2013

To: "'Ontology Summit 2013 discussion'" <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Hans Polzer" <hpolzer@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 20:59:19 -0500
Message-id: <034801cdd8d5$77551230$65ff3690$@verizon.net>
John,    (01)

I had some exposure about 10 years ago to some work done at Cal Poly and
CADRC that used an ontology-driven agent software architecture for
developing decision support systems, including an experimental command and
control system for the US Marines. Here's the link:
http://www.cadrc.calpoly.edu/frame_text/text_projects_loggy.html    (02)

I never got to confirm the claims of being ontology-driven, but it might be
worth contacting Dr. Jens Pohl to see if he wants to offer up some examples
of pragmatic application of ontologies to building real-world systems.    (03)

Bob Kruse at FacetApp also claims to have built systems based on an
ontology-driven application framework. His email address is
rkruse@xxxxxxxxxxxx    (04)

Hans    (05)

Hans    (06)

-----Original Message-----
From: ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontology-summit-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John F Sowa
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2012 12:45 PM
To: ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] Potential Tracks for Ontology Summit 2013    (07)

Unfortunately, I can't call in to the telecon on Thursday.    (08)

But I'd like make some comments.  I'll start with a general comment about
Michael's list of topics:  None of them mention successful applications of
ontology to mission-critical applications.    (09)

I am not asking for presentations *about* applications.  But examples and
use cases *derived from* practical experience are far, far more valuable
than abstract notions of what might be theoretically useful.    (010)

I sent a related comment to the IAOA list:
> Suggestion:  We should gather a list of *successful* cases or, more 
> specifically, *deployed* systems that implement an ontology that is in 
> daily use for mission-critical applications.
>
> If we had such a list (with URLs for detailed documentation), we could 
> analyze them to determine the criteria that distinguish practical 
> applications of ontology from wishful thinking.    (011)

This suggestion generated one response (copy below).    (012)

I agree with Nicola on many points, but I have some serious concerns about
some assumptions that I believe are unrealistic.
> In the past, I have isolated and discussed such criteria: precision, 
> completeness, accuracy. See
>
> http://www.slideshare.net/NicolaGuarino1/ontology-quality-ontology-des
> ign-patterns-and-competency-questions
> Why Evaluate Ontology Technology? Because it Works!    (013)

 From Nicola's concluding slide:
> Underspecification:  simplicity encourages reusability but risks to 
> decrease interoperability.    (014)

No!  Underspecification is *essential* for interoperability.  For examples,
just look at the GoodRelations ontology, which is widely used and has been
adopted for Schema.org by Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, and Yandex.  That
ontology defines a set of terms with a bare minimum of details -- and it
*maximizes* interoperability.    (015)

Precision with unique models is only possible for two kinds of
theories:  (a) very general mathematical theories, and (b) very specialized
applications that cannot be shared with anybody else.
Interoperability requires flexibility, *not* unique models.    (016)

Tim Wilson asked
> I would consider from the beginning, starting with picking a platform...
>
> Can I get by with freeware like Protege or do I need the capabilities 
> of a Cyc-like application?    (017)

Unfortunately, there is no platform for ontology that anybody with a
mission-critical application would consider.    (018)

When the most widely used platform was developed by university students,
that is a sign that the technology is very immature.
When a platform (Cyc) can only be used by people with long training in AI,
that is another sign that the technology is very immature.    (019)

Matthew West has long experience in industry.  He understands the
requirements for application development, maintenance, and use:
> We need to make sure that evaluation is grounded in meeting requirements.
>
> So if we think certain evaluation criteria are important, like say 
> reusability, we need to identify a requirement such as minimising cost 
> across multiple applications    (020)

Precision with unique models would destroy flexibility, and it would make
changes, extensions, and revisions impossible.  You could not have multiple
applications.    (021)

John    (022)

-------- Original Message --------
Subject:  Re: [iaoa-member] semantics in various architectures
Date:   Mon, 10 Dec 2012 18:21:31 -0200
From:   Mara Abel
To:     [IAOA-member] <iaoa-member@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>    (023)

Dear all    (024)

I can offer two real examples.    (025)

Petroledge and Strataledge systems (http://www.endeeper.com/).  Both are
based on ontologies for petroleum geology, although they are quite different
in terms of persistence of ontology and user data, mainly related to the age
of each system (10 years, 2 years).    (026)

I have published some papers about the ontology definition, but none
describing how we made the system work with the ontologies.    (027)

Abel, M., K. Goldberg e L. F. D. Ros. Ontology-based  rock description and
interpretation. In: M. Perrin e J.-F. Rainaud (Ed.). _Knowledge Driven Earth
Modelling. Paris: Editions Technip, v.1, 2012.
Ontology-based  rock description and interpretation, p.268-271    (028)

Abel, M., L. S. Mastella, L. a. L. Silva, J. A. Campbell e L. F. D.
Ros. How to model visual knowledge: a study of expertise in oil-reservoir
evaluation. In: F. Galindo, M. Takizawa/, et al/ (Ed.).
_Database and Expert Systems Applications_. Zaragoza , Spain:
Springer-Verlag GmbH & Company KG, Berlin, Germany, v.3180, 2004.
p.455-464. (Lecture Notes in Computer Science)    (029)

Mara    (030)

_________________________________________________________________
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/OntologySummit2013/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2013
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/     (031)


_________________________________________________________________
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/OntologySummit2013/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2013  
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/     (032)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>