Hi Pat, (01)
Cassidy, Patrick J. wrote: (02)
>
>
>For that reason, I believe that "subProcess", "subSituation" and
>"Temporal Part" could all be accommodated in a common subset ontology,
>depending on how closely identified SUMO "Process", OpenCyc "Situation"
>and DOLCE "Perdurant" are.
>
>
>
This is a nice way to kickoff a case study, but we have the opportunity to
do this in a more rigorous way.
The first step is to identify the relevant axioms for each of the terms.
The second step is to characterize the models of the theories, because
we need
to determine whether the models of one theory are isomorphic to
substructures
of models of the other theory (following the definition of definable
interpretation).
The third step is to actually prove that one theory can be definably
interpreted
in another, or identify a new nontrivial theory that generalizes both. (03)
By the way, PSL has two terms related to the composition of processes.
The first is the binary relation (subactivity ?a1 ?a2) which is
axiomatized in
the core theory subactivity.th
(http://www.mel.nist.gov/psl/psl-ontology/part12/subactivity.th.html)
This relation is isomorphic to a discrete partial ordering on the set of
activities. (04)
The second relevant term is the binary relation (subactivity_occurrence
?o1 ?o2)
which is axiomatized in the core theory actocc.th
(http://www.mel.nist.gov/psl/psl-ontology/part12/act_occ.th.html)
This is a partial ordering over the set of activity occurrences. (05)
- michael (06)
_________________________________________________________________
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 (07)
|