SUO: Re: A Common SUO Document To Focus On
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤
Adam Pease wrote:
>
> Philip,
>
> We may have different understandings for what counts as "formal".
> For example, it appears to me that a human must read the English
> definitions to understand what each term means. Robert has supplied
> axioms in his explanatory text, but there is no structural requirement
> that that be done.
>
> As examples, Ian Niles has merged Robert's ontology with
> his "merged ontology". Each of the axioms is shown in
> a browser that requires statements in a formal language
> (although one can put comments in English on terms as well).
> If you look at:
>
> http://ontology.teknowledge.com:8080/rsigma/SKB.jsp?req=SC&name=Entity&caseSensitive=on&skb=Merge
>
> you'll see one of Robert's axioms:
>
> (=>
> (instance-of ?x Entity)
> (not
> (and
> (instance-of ?x Class)
> (instance-of ?x Set))))
>
> Each term is hyperlinked so you can find the formal, logical
> definition of Class, Set, instance-of etc. Most importantly,
> because the definitions are in a formal computable language,
> an automated inference engine can work with these definitions
> without human assistance. This is a critical aspect of
> the ontology, and part of our charter (see the phrase
> "...automated inferencing..." from the scope and purpose).
>
> Adam
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤
Adam,
I would be very interested in knowing what kind
of "automated inference engine" (AIE) you folks
are currently using over your representation --
for example, what happens when you run it over
your merged or meta-merged ontology in toto?
Jon Awbrey
¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤~~~~~~~~~¤