Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

THIS SLIDE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. I H M C DAML+OIL has no natural role for variables, and no variable binders. This may well be seen as an advantage:

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "THIS SLIDE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. I H M C DAML+OIL has no natural role for variables, and no variable binders. This may well be seen as an advantage:"— Presentation transcript:

1 THIS SLIDE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

2 I H M C DAML+OIL has no natural role for variables, and no variable binders. This may well be seen as an advantage: (subclass A B) (forall (?x)(implies (A ?x)(B ?x))) P is restriction of Q on R to S (forall (?x) (iff (P ?x)(and (Q ?x)(exists (?y)(and (R ?x ?y) (S ?y)))))) DAML+OIL Schema Parameter Interface Format

3 I H M C However, many uses of, and likely future extensions to, DAML+OIL require the use of variables to allow pattern- matching: 1. allowing external software to bind values to parameters (CoABS policy tool; DAML-S applications) 2. syntax for atomic component of 'rules' and queries 3. controlling use of URL's across networks (as in HORUS) DAML+OIL Schema Parameter Interface Format

4 I H M C Changing DAML to include variables raises a host of semantic issues which we propose to completely avoid. This is a purely syntactic proposal. No semantics is provided for the variables until they have been completely instantiated. In logical terms, these are schematic (not quantified) variables; in programming language terms, they are macros. To avoid confusion we call them parameters. DAML+OIL distinguishes two kinds of 'name': URIs and literals. The proposal is an extended notation in which URI's may be replaced by URI parameters and literals by literal parameters. DAML+OIL Schema Parameter Interface Format

5 I H M C Uri-parameter ::= ?word / Literal-parameter ::= ??word / word ::= [^ ? / space ]+ A URI [literal] term is either a URI [literal] or a URI [literal] parameter. A substitution is a sequence of substitution pairs consisting of a URI [literal] parameter and a URI [literal] term. DAML+OIL Schema Parameter Interface Format

6 I H M C ?actionType/ DAML+OIL Schema Parameter Interface Format

7 I H M C ?actionType/ ?actionType/ #DelegateAction ?performer/ #Domain_Manager ?actionType/ #Multi_Actor_Action ?performer/ #ActorGroup DAML+OIL Schema Parameter Interface Format

8 I H M C EQUAL ``grey'' A more compact notation (with Frank v. Harmelen) Class elephant SubClassOf #animal [which #eats #plant; which #color EQUAL `grey]

9 I H M C Class herbivore IntersectionOf [#animal which #eats UnionOf [#plant; which #is_part_of hasValue #plant] ] A more compact notation (with Frank v. Harmelen)

10 I H M C A brief essay inspired by conversations with Lynn Stein Bill Andersen Jim Hendler Adam Pease Jerry Hobbs and others too numerous to mention

11 I H M C { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "ImageObject", "contentUrl": "http://images.slideplayer.com/2/720755/slides/slide_11.jpg", "name": "I H M C

12 I H M C If I use a term from your ontology, how much of your ontology am I assuming?

13 I H M C If I use a term from your ontology, how much of your ontology am I assuming? A1: Only the parts that I explicitly endorse or include

14 I H M C If I use a term from your ontology, how much of your ontology am I assuming? A1: Only the parts that I explicitly endorse or include A2: Enough to establish the intended meaning of the term

15 I H M C If I use a term from your ontology, how much of your ontology am I assuming? A1: Only the parts that I explicitly endorse or include A2: Enough to establish the intended meaning of the term A3: All of it

16 I H M C If I use a term from your ontology, how much of your ontology am I assuming? A1: Only the parts that I explicitly endorse or include A2: Enough to establish the intended meaning of the term A3: All of it A4: None of it

17 I H M C If I use a term from your ontology, how much of your ontology am I assuming? Wrong answer: The question doesnt arise since we are all basically part of One World Wide Ontology

18 I H M C OK, at least we are using the same notation, which is a good start.

19 I H M C OK, at least we are using the same notation, which is a good start. BUT if you are using a closed world assumption and I am not, we will misunderstand one another.

20 I H M C OK, at least we are using the same notation, which is a good start. BUT

21 I H M C You say… Employees are a subclass of persons I say… Employment is a property some people have

22 I H M C You say… Things are physical objects I say… Things include ideas, integers, intentions, states of mind, The Grinch…

23 I H M C You say… Things are physical objects I say… Things include ideas, integers, intentions, states of mind, The Grinch, fluents, tropes, eventualities, ways of being, possible worlds, whatever

24 I H M C You say… Things are physical objects I say… Things are physical objects

25 I H M C You say… Things are physical objects I say… Things are physical objects BUT You say… Physical objects retain their identity through time and change their properties I say… Physical objects have temporal parts which have timeless properties

26 I H M C You say… Things are physical objects I say… Things are physical objects BUT You say… Physical objects retain their identity through time and change their properties I say… Physical objects have temporal parts which have timeless properties

27 Describing events/actions/processes/occurrents/happenings… Things change…so need to make assertions relative to times TrickleDown: push temporal parameters as deep into the expression as they need to go (but no further). R(a,b,c) + T [R(a,b,c),T]simple proposition true at time [R,T](a,b,c)time-indexed relation (eg position) R(a,b,c,[T])time-relative assertion R([a,T],b,[c,T]) dynamic entities Often most natural language for humans Often most effective for automatic reasoning about complex domain Often most effective for action planning Corresponds to linguistic analyses

28 I H M C You say… holes are physical things, and holes can only be whole I say… holes are spatio-temporal but not physical, and can have parts He says… holes arent physical, but are necessarily located in physical things and cannot have parts And he says… holes dont exist as entities, but are locations which are empty.

29 I H M C Which ontology should be chosen/adopted/made into the standard?

30 I H M C Which ontology should be chosen/adopted/made into the standard? WRONG QUESTION ! All these viewpoints have their uses, are internally coherent and are legitimate points of view. There is no single best answer.

31 I H M C Long Term Ways to broker meanings between different ontological perspectives (translation techniques, known safe routes, neutral ontological territory.) Medium Term Ways to SAY what parts of one ontology are being included into another, and to analyze the consequences. Short Term Agree that there is a problem to be solved. LUNCH


Download ppt "THIS SLIDE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK. I H M C DAML+OIL has no natural role for variables, and no variable binders. This may well be seen as an advantage:"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google