1. Brian Donohue, J. Neil Otte, and Barry Smith University at Buffalo November 2014

2. Brian Donohue, bd26@buffalo.edubd26@buffalo.edu J. Neil Otte, jeffotte@buffalo.edujeffotte@buffalo.edu

3. Ontology team led by Ron Rudnicki

4. 4

5. Our purpose here To build a cumulative, easily accessible, integrated, and continuously updated resource to provide information concerning territorial disputes.

6. Basic Formal Ontology (BFO) A simple top-level ontology to support information integration Defining a framework that will help to ensure consistency and non-redundancy of the ontology modules created in its terms through downward population 6

7. Example: The Cell Ontology

8. http://www.ifomis.org/bfo/users I2WD Ontologies (http://milportal.org) cROP Ontologies EnvO Environment Ontology US Army Biometrics Ontology NIF Standard (Neuroscience) Ontologies OAE Ontology of Adverse Events OBO Foundry Ontologies OGMS Ontology for General Medical Science IDO Infectious Disease Ontologies (NIAID) 8

9. Modular, downward population approach in other domains 9 OBO FoundaryOpen Biomedical Ontologies NIF StandardNeuroscience Information Framework IDO ConsortiumInfectious Disease Ontology cROPCommon Reference Ontologies for Plants MilPortal.orgMilitary Ontology I2WD OntologiesIntelligence Ontology Suite

10. 10

11. 11

12. Basic Formal Ontology 1.0 http://www.ifomis.org/bfo/ http://www.ifomis.org/bfo/ Continuant Occurrent Independent Continuant Dependent Continuant Thing Process Attribute 12

13. Dependent Continuant Quality Realizable Dependent Continuant 13 DispositionFunctionRole of banana, to ripen of heart, to pump blood of employee, to work for pay

14. process of realization depends_on realizable Continuant Occurrent Independent Continuant bearer Realizable Dependent Continuant disposition................ 14 Process of realization

15. IAO-Intel Email Ontology IAO-Science Information Artifact Ontology (IAO) Basic Formal Ontology (BFO) 15 BFO-based Ontology Development

16. BFO 1.1: Specifically Dependent Continuant Specifically Dependent Continuant Quality, Role, Disposition Realizable Dependent Continuant if any bearer ceases to exist, then the quality or function ceases to exist the color of my skin the function of my heart 16

17. Generically Dependent Continuant Generically Dependent Continuant pdf file jpg file Gene Sequence if one bearer ceases to exist, then the entity can survive, because there are other bearers (copyability) the pdf file on my laptop the DNA (sequence) in this chromosome 17

18. Information artifacts pdf file email poem symphony algorithm symbol – can migrate from one information bearer to another 18

19. Continuant Independent Continuant Specifically Dependent Continuant Quality Disposition Information Artifact Role Realizable Dependent Continuant 19 Generically Dependent Continuant Gene Sequence BFO 1.1

20. Continuant Independent Continuant Specifically Dependent Continuant Quality Information Artifact 20 Generically Dependent Continuant Gene Sequence Material Entity Information Bearing Entity

21. Continuant Independent Continuant Specifically Dependent Continuant Quality Information Artifact 21 Generically Dependent Continuant Material Entity Information Bearing Entity (your hard drive Information Quality Entity (pattern on your hard drive) depends_on

22. Continuant Independent Continuant Specifically Dependent Continuant Quality Information Content Entity 22 Generically Dependent Continuant Material Entity Information Bearing Entity Information Quality Entity depends_on concretized_by BFO IAO

23. Independent Continuant Specifically Dependent Continuant Quality Information Content Entity 23 Generically Dependent Continuant Material Entity Information Bearing Entity Information Quality Entity depends_on concretized_by universals instances this hard drive, that book this excitation pattern, that pattern of piles of ink this pdf file, that Target Value Matrix

24. Next step: Document Ontology, Document Control Ontology 24

25. Our Purpose To build an ontology of territorial disputes

26. Problems to Overcome 1.Identifying disputes through time. 2. Identifying participants in a dispute, including: a) disputing parties, b) external or third parties, c) actions, d) territories, e) information artifacts involved in disputes, and f) objectives and motives of the parties. 3. Identifying false claims.

27. Disputes In Basic Formal Ontology, disputes (and conflicts) are relational processes; that is, they are processes dependent upon and involving as participants at least two agents.

28. Document ontology Bob Glushko: “A document is a purposeful and self-contained collection of information.” (Document Engineering)

29. 29 Document Ontology the social and institutional (deontic, quasi-legal) powers of documents the social interactions in which documents play an essential role (how documents bind people together) the sorts of things which we can do with documents the different types of institutional systems to which documents belong the provenance of documents (on what distinguishes original, authentic documents from copies, forgeries...) http://ontology.buffalo.edu/document_ontology/

30. Documents relevant to territorial disputes treaties, press releases, policy statements, with parts such as maps descriptions, arguments with premises and conclusions, citations of principles, claims, etc.

31. Participants in a dispute With a claim to a territory: Governments Indigenous populations with a claim to a territory. Private individuals Non-claimants: Third parties Intergovernmental organizations,

32. Application: Kuril Islands The Kuril Islands have been a subject of territorial dispute and conflict for over 150 years. The Russian Federation and Japanese Government are agents_in the dispute. Different treaties at different times have created different demarcations of territory within the Kuril Island chain.

35. Kuril Islands Act of Treaty Signing 1945 event: Act event: Act time: Temporal Interval Identifier time: Temporal Interval Identifier geo: Island geo: Island is a bfo: Occurrent bfo: Occurrent info: Designative Information Content Entity info: Designative Information Content Entity geo: Geographic Feature geo: Geographic Feature is a bfo:Site bfo: Generically Dependent Continuant is a

36. Russia Russian Government Dispute over Arctic Arctic Territory Country Relational Process Site is a participates in is delimited by has subject Act of Reporting agent in Report has output Document is a is about

37. Russia Russian Federation Japan Japanese Government Act of Treaty Signing Temporal Interval “1945” Yalta Agreement Kuril Islands is delimited by agent in occurs on designated by has output is about

38. Kuril Islands Treaty Timeline

40. Arguments in BFO Arguments are information content entities that have two other information content entities as components: one or more premises and a conclusion.

41. Arguments Example: Argument for the Legality of Israeli Settlements P1. Principle of a Sovereignty Vacuum: “Where the prior holder of territory had seized that territory unlawfully, the State which subsequently takes the territory in the lawful exercise of self- defense has, against that prior holder, better title.” P2. Israeli conquest of Arab-held territory was defensive rather than aggressive. C. Israeli settlements are legal.

43. Schwebel: Justice in Law

44. Objectives, Motives, and Strategies Objectives are ends of action. Example: Nations may have economic objectives. Motives include reasons for acting. Example: a restoration of territory lost and expansion of territory for economic exploitation. The realization of an objective may constitute the motive of a nation. Strategies are plan specifications that prescribe steps toward achieving some objective.

45. Big Problem of False Claims How do we model the content of false sentences without being committed to the entities named therein? Example: “The North Korean government claims it owns New Jersey.”

46. Our Strategy for False Claims Step One: Use the lacks_part relation to capture the true state of affairs that makes the claim false. The lacks_part relation holds between a particular p and a universal U whenever p has no instance of U as part. Example: “North Korea lacks_part New Jersey.” Step Two: Tag the claim as false, allowing us to read the claim as containing a wide scope negation operator (It is not the case that “ “). Example: “North Korea claims it owns New Jersey” becomes “North Korea claims ‘It is not the case that:’ North Korea lacks_part New Jersey.”

48. Russia’s false claim in Ukraine

49. North Korea on its labor camps.

50. Uses of the ontology To create the first knowledgebase of territorial disputes information A step towards algorithmic history A teaching tool A retrieval tool An aid to the more reasoned treatment of conflicting territorial claims