Re: SUO: 2000-7-26 example
Murray,
At 11:02 AM 8/22/2001 -0400, Yang Yun wrote:
> >>Perhaps as an example, in identifying the meaning of "executive" in
> >>the following sentence, it will probably not be useful to identify
> >>merely events, properties, attributes, classes, actions and
> >>similar. Instead, one needs at least domain specific knowledge
> >>about possible concepts (and their linguistic realizations) in the
> >>field of "politics".
>
> >>"On his arrival in Belfast, there was no sign of an end to the deep
> >>divisions between Sinn Fein and the Ulster Unionists on the
> >>formation of a new executive for Northern Ireland and on the
> >>decommissioning of all paramilitary weapons."
>
> >>Nevertheless, I understand the objective of the SUO project is to
> >>define higher levels first which will give anchors for lower level,
> >>domain specific ontologies. This is a reasonable objective,
> >>although it may be more effective to start from the lower levels
> >>and combine, merge them at an appropriate time
> >>into a more abstract higher level ontology.
> >>
> >>
> >> Paul Buitelaar
> >> DFKI Language Technology
> >> Saarbrücken, Germany
> >>
> >> http://www.dfki.de/~paulb/
>
>
>
>This example shows the need to consider domain-specific uses
>of words eg use of executive in UK politics. The meaning is
>defined by statute to be :
>http://www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1998/80047--d.htm#20
>or "cabinet" in the US.
We can map domain-specific words to concepts in the SUMO much in the same
way the WordNet mapping is being performed using synonymousExternalConcept
etc.
>Adam Pease below argues the example shows that a standard ontology
>could help disambiguate 2 common senses of executive ie manager
>(person) and administration (governing body). Since a person
>cannot form another person, the meaning must be administration.
>
>Maybe not, because Section 20 says the executive is comprised
>of people (first minister, deputy, and others).Why should a
>reasoner know that a person cannot form these people either?
In SUMO Human is a distinct class from Group. We should add an axiom to
Group though that constrains it to require more than one member and Ian is
doing that just now.
Adam
>yy
>
>-------included message---------------
> From: apease
>To: Paul Buitelaar ; SUO
>Subject: Re: [Fwd: Call for vote on SUO Scope and Purpose]
>Date: Saturday, July 22, 2000 2:38 AM
>
>
>Paul,
> I may have misunderstood your example, but it seems to me an
>excellent
>example in fact of how an upper ontology could assist in
>disambiguating
>natural language.
> If we formulate your example sentence loosely as
>
>(instance-of Formulate-Token1 CreationAction)
>(performedBy Formulate-Token1 SinnFein)
>(performedBy Formulate-Token1 UlsterUnionists)
>(objectActedOn Formulate-Token1 Executive-Lexeme2)
>
>and we need to decide which is correct
>
>(instance-of Executive-CompanyManager Executive-Lexeme2)
> or
>(instance-of Executive-GoverningBody Executive-Lexeme2)
>
>and we further assume that these terms have been defined with respect
>to an
>SUO, if the SUO has very general rules that state people can't create
>other
>adult humans, then the NLU system could pick the correct definition
>for the
>instance.
> While the meanings of Executive-GoverningBody, SinnFein etc would
>have
>to be created in a domain specific ontology, the value of the SUO in
>this
>example seems clear to me.
>
>Adam
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>-----A-d-v-e-r-t-i-s-e-m-e-n-t-s---B-e-l-o-w--------------
>Searching for the best free email? Try MetaCrawler Mail, from the #1
>metasearch service on the Web, http://www.metacrawler.com
Adam Pease
Teknowledge
(650) 424-0500 x571