Re: SUO: OpenCyc Announcement
Cyc has KE quality problems as has the current Merged Ontology++.
http://reliant.teknowledge.com/RKF/meetings/RKF_TKCP_121900/contextual
_clusterings/sld010.htm
One reason for going opensource with a stream of beta versions of
OpenCyc could be to try to fix these problems with the help of a
wider peer community.
Any SUO proposals should be examined systematically and thoroughly.
Do we have agreed procedures, guidelines and criteria? These could be
written up as an ancillary Guidelines document to a standard.
Even before such a Guidelines document is written, it would be
helpful to have a literature search amd summary of existing knowledge
in the area, including knowledge from similar groups such as ISO
11179-3 , ISO TC37 , Darpa Ontology, ANSI Thesaurus etc.
Without clear guidelines for the evaluation, there is a perception of
unfairness. There is an economic incentive for companies to misuse
the standards process. The payoff is in market acceptance of their
branded products, faster time to market with complying product, and
spinoffs such as training and certification. No problem! As long as
the process is fair and seen to be fair. Let's document one...
---- Begin Original Message ----
From: "Philip Jackson" <phil.jackson@computer.org>
Sent: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 08:31:57 -0500
To: "pat hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, <mfu@redwood.rt.cs.boeing.com>
CC: <standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org>
Subject: SUO: OpenCyc Announcement
Hey Pat,
In view of Doug's recent announcement
(http://www.cyc.com/opencycpressrelease03062001.html), I guess the
next
thing we can expect is that Bill Gates will give away Windows 2000, to
compete with Linux :-)
I suggest we keep working on SUO, to give Doug a reason to give
*everything*
away :-)
Seriously, I think that Mike Uschold's recent post makes a lot of
sense. I
especially like the following quote:
MU: 'we' should instead do a systematic and thorough investigation
of CYC,
and answer the above
question. The answer might be, there is no reason to build another
SUO.
Alternatively, it should take the form of a thorough critique of Cyc
indicating the shortcomings, and why it is insufficient (if it is)
and how
it
needs to be augmented or replaced by a 'real' SUO.. An alternative
thread of
activity can be as Nicola recommends, to spend time relating
alternatives,
and work towards a library of reference ontologies, one
of which will be Cyc.
Along the lines of a critique of Cyc, one starting point could be the
paper:
Mahesh, Kavi, Sergei Nirenburg, Jim Cowie & David Farwell (1996) An
assessment of Cyc for natural language processing. MCCS-96-302,
Computing
Research Laboratory, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, New
Mexico.
Available at
http://crl.nmsu.edu/Research/Pubs/MCCS/Abstracts/mccs-96-302.htm
Cheers,
Phil Jackson
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Imagination is more important than knowledge. Knowledge is
limited. Imagination encircles the world." - Einstein
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard Disclaimers. www.philjackson.prohosting.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org
> [mailto:owner-standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org]On Behalf Of pat
hayes
> Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2001 12:39 PM
> To: Philip Jackson
> Cc: standard-upper-ontology@ieee.org
> Subject: Re: SUO: On the relevance of EXPRESS, EPISTLE, etc. to
SUO --
> RE: RE: RE: Some Procedural Suggestions
>
>
>
> >; b) going
> >with CYC, if a suitable copyright release letter can be obtained.
>
> Forget that option. Doug is not about to give away his company for
> the good of the world, and neither should he feel any obligation to,
> after the work he and about 50 others have put into it for over a
> decade. This would be like asking Bill Gates to make Windows 2000
> into freeware.
>
> Pat Hayes
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> IHMC (850)434 8903 home
> 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office
> Pensacola, FL 32501 (850)202 4440 fax
> phayes@ai.uwf.edu
> http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
>
---- End Original Message ----
-------------------------------------------------------
Searching for the best free email? Try MetaCrawler Mail, from the #1 metasearch service on the Web, http://www.metacrawler.com