Re: SUO: OpenCyc Motion Open for Discussions
Cathy,
At 16:03 2003-04-10, Cathy Legg wrote:
>Hi John,
>
>...
>
>Why isn't Cyc already doing this with microtheories (without the false
>assertions and the tautologous top and the inconsistent bottom)?
>
>The Cyc microtheories are organized into a partial ordering via
>implies, which is how you were describing the lattice of theories in
>your message to Radu.
"Implies?" Do you mean material implication? What exactly does this
mean? That (#$genlMt #$lower #$upper) says that the conjunction of the
formulas in #$lower implies the conjunction of those in #$upper? That
the conjunction of the formulas in #$lower implies the disjunction of
those in #$upper (as if #$genlMt was a sequent: #$lower |- #$upper)?
One of these in the opposite direction, from #$upper to #$lower? None
of these seems sensible to me.
I really don't get how #$genlMt is associated with implication. Could
you explain?
(Maybe if we iterate this process enough, I'll get my answer to "what
are the semantics of CycL?" question.)
>...
>
>Cheers,
>Cathy.
Randall Schulz
H&S Information Systems
P.S. I'm including the CC to cg@cs.uah.edu, but I don't think I can post there.