Matthew, (01)
I pretty much buy the description of automated reasoning at:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/reasoning-automated/. (02)
Although the author focuses on FOL-based reasoning, I would also
included description logic reasoning. (03)
Generally, I would exclude expert systems, which I would say
approximate logical inference using the Rete algorithm (and which acted
as a step in the evolution of AI prior to more of an adoption of
logical methods), but are really programs that make partially
declarative some aspects of imperative programming. I've written about
the deficiencies of of expert systems before, so I will not go into it
here. (04)
By the way, I view the rise of ontological engineering and the use of
formal logic for representation and reasoning as greatly improving
those defiencies. (05)
I know that in reason years, databases have added active and passive
triggers, which a specialized rules, and the rise of constraint
databases. I include Datalog as a knowledge representation language,
and hence able to be automatically reasoned on much like full Prolog. (06)
I also don't exclude inductive or abductive reasoning (though the
latter is unsound from the normal deductive perspective), nor
probabilistic reasoning ala Judea Pearl, Renee Dechter, et al. (07)
Thanks,
Leo (08)
_____________________________________________
Dr. Leo Obrst The MITRE Corporation, Information Semantics
lobrst@xxxxxxxxx Center for Innovative Computing & Informatics
Voice: 703-983-6770 7515 Colshire Drive, M/S H305
Fax: 703-983-1379 McLean, VA 22102-7508, USA (09)
-----Original Message-----
From: uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of West,
Matthew R SIPC-DFD/321
Sent: Monday, March 06, 2006 4:07 AM
To: Upper Ontology Summit convention
Subject: RE: [uos-convene] KBR vs SQL (010)
Dear Leo, (011)
It strikes me that we have rather different ideas about what reasoning
is. So, before leaping into this further, could I ask you what it is
that makes a system a reasoning system? (012)
Regards (013)
Matthew West
Reference Data Architecture and Standards Manager
Shell International Petroleum Company Limited
Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom (014)
Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Mobile: +44 7796 336538
Email: matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx
http://www.shell.com
http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/ (015)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of
> Obrst, Leo J.
> Sent: 05 March 2006 22:06
> To: Upper Ontology Summit convention
> Subject: RE: [uos-convene] KBR vs SQL
>
>
> Oh, come on, Bill. Since when are relational databases reasoning
> systems? Since programming was invented, i.e., a program represents
> some programmer's thoughts about the data and what he/she means about
> that data? So programs that use databases are reasoning systems?
> Because programs encapsulate human reasoning?
>
> This is silly, sorry.
>
> If ontology is about organization, you should be very happy with OWL,
> since as a description logic (also called terminological logic,
> classification logic), it is focused on classification and nearly
> nothing else. Deductive reasoning doesn't really even figure until
you
> add SWRL.
>
> I think you need to re-evaluate your rhetoric about this stuff! ;)
> (Hey, I'm am undergoing rhetorical revamping myself; I need
company!).
>
> Thanks,
> Leo
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bill
> Andersen
> Sent: Sunday, March 05, 2006 10:28 AM
> To: Upper Ontology Summit convention
> Subject: Re: [uos-convene] KBR vs SQL
>
> Pat...
>
> Not being flip here...
>
> (1) relational database systems *are* reasoning systems just as much (016)
> as anything.
>
> (2) IMHO, ontology in the information systems context is not about
> *reasoning* but about *organization*. Subtle but important
> difference. Deductive reasoning techniques are an enabler
> but take a
> back seat to organization because there are lots of reasoning tasks
> deductive systems don't do. Here's it's useful to think of
> the world
> as a big video game and "the true ontology" (if there is one) as its (017)
> data model. The "AI" of the video game is the "reasoning". Now, in (018)
> practical application all kind of other effects (e.g. epistemic)
> creep in and those may need to be dealt with using other reasoning
> techniques. Some may call the whole package "ontology" but I prefer (019)
> the more constrained interpretation - it frames the problem better.
>
> (3) Properly done, ontology makes your pet store database better.
> That application probably involves neither analysis nor
> exploitation,
> except perhaps of parakeets.
>
> I'm trying to think of something I'd like to see but I have to leave (020)
> now for a trip. I promise to work on it.
>
> .bill
>
> On Mar 5, 2006, at 10:01 , Cassidy, Patrick J. wrote:
>
> > Matthew, Bill -
> > Does this wording avoid the potential misinterpretations you
were
> > concerned with?
> >
> >
> > (1) We agree that the technology of modeling and representing
> > knowledge
> > has developed to the point where it makes possible the creation of
> > knowledge-based reasoning systems that significantly enhance the
> > capabilities of existing relational database systems and
> > object-oriented programming, to provide information analysis and
> > exploitation capabilities that cannot be realized with those
> > traditional systems alone.
> >
> > Pat
> >
> >
> > Patrick Cassidy
> > MITRE Corporation
> > 260 Industrial Way
> > Eatontown, NJ 07724
> > Mail Stop: MNJE
> > Phone: 732-578-6340
> > Cell: 908-565-4053
> > Fax: 732-578-6012
> > Email: pcassidy@xxxxxxxxx
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of West,
> > Matthew R SIPC-DFD/321
> > Sent: Sunday, March 05, 2006 3:50 AM
> > To: Upper Ontology Summit convention
> > Subject: RE: [uos-convene] KBR vs SQL
> >
> > Dear Pat,
> >
> > The way it reads at present (to me at least) is "Databases are
dead,
> > KBR systems are going to blow them away". If you mean what you say
> > below then you need to include phrases like "extend the capability"
> > and "complementary" which I do not see in the current text.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Matthew
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> [mailto:uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Cassidy,
> >> Patrick J.
> >> Sent: 04 March 2006 14:27
> >> To: Upper Ontology Summit convention
> >> Subject: RE: [uos-convene] KBR vs SQL
> >>
> >>
> >> Mathew,
> >> Since the large ontology-based applications that will be useful
> > for
> >> major problems are likely to use relational databases (or their
> >> equivalent) as their back-end, what is the problem with
> >> saying that the
> >> capabilities of such systems are more advanced than the
> >> capabilities of
> >> database systems alone? They are indeed not "competing" but they
> are
> >> also not "complementary"; the larger ontology-based systems will
> > build
> >> on and extend the database systems.
> >>
> >> Pat
> >>
> >>
> >> Patrick Cassidy
> >> MITRE Corporation
> >> 260 Industrial Way
> >> Eatontown, NJ 07724
> >> Mail Stop: MNJE
> >> Phone: 732-578-6340
> >> Cell: 908-565-4053
> >> Fax: 732-578-6012
> >> Email: pcassidy@xxxxxxxxx
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> [mailto:uos-convene-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of West,
> >> Matthew R SIPC-DFD/321
> >> Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 6:43 AM
> >> To: uos-convene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Subject: [uos-convene] KBR vs SQL
> >>
> >> Dear Ray,
> >>
> >> The first "conclusion in brief" is:
> >>
> >> "(1) We agree that the technology of modeling and representing
> >> knowledge has developed to the point where it is feasible to
> >> create knowledge-based reasoning systems with information
> >> analysis and exploitation capabilities significantly more
> >> advanced than traditional systems based on relational databases
> >> and object-oriented programming without semantic interpretation."
> >>
> >> Well I don't agree.
> >>
> >> Ontology can help improve the design of systems using traditional
> >> technology, and I can see Knowledge Based Applications adding
> >> significant value to those traditionally developed systems. I can
> >> also see some genuinely "the web as a database" type applications.
> >> However, I think it is inappropriate to compare in this way
> >> traditional systems (that are largely transaction processing
> >> based) and Knowledge Based Systems. They are complementary not
> >> competing technologies.
> >>
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> Matthew West
> >> Reference Data Architecture and Standards Manager
> >> Shell International Petroleum Company Limited
> >> Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United Kingdom
> >>
> >> Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Mobile: +44 7796 336538
> >> Email: matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx
> >> http://www.shell.com
> >> http://www.matthew-west.org.uk/
> >>
> >> _________________________________________________________________
> >> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uos-convene/
> >> To Post: mailto:uos-convene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/
> >> Shared Files:
> >> http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UpperOntologySummit/uos-convene/
> >> Community Wiki:
> >> http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UpperOntologySummit
> >> _________________________________________________________________
> >> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uos-convene/
> >> To Post: mailto:uos-convene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/
> >> Shared Files:
> > http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UpperOntologySummit/uos-convene/
> > Community Wiki:
> > http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UpperOntologySummit
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uos-convene/
> > To Post: mailto:uos-convene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/
> > Shared Files:
> > http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UpperOntologySummit/uos-convene/
> > Community Wiki:
> > http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UpperOntologySummit
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uos-convene/
> > To Post: mailto:uos-convene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/
> > Shared Files:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UpperOntologySummit/
> uos-convene/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?
> UpperOntologySummit
> (021)
Bill Andersen (andersen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Chief Scientist
Ontology Works, Inc. (www.ontologyworks.com)
3600 O'Donnell Street, Suite 600
Baltimore, MD 21224
Office: 410-675-1201
Cell: 443-858-6444 (022)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uos-convene/
To Post: mailto:uos-convene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/
Shared Files:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UpperOntologySummit/uos-convene/
Community Wiki:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UpperOntologySummit
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uos-convene/
To Post: mailto:uos-convene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/
Shared Files:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UpperOntologySummit/uos-convene/
Community Wiki:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UpperOntologySummit (023)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uos-convene/
To Post: mailto:uos-convene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/
Shared Files:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UpperOntologySummit/uos-convene/
Community Wiki:
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UpperOntologySummit
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/uos-convene/
To Post: mailto:uos-convene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/UpperOntologySummit/uos-convene/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?UpperOntologySummit (024)
|