Background-assumptions in knowledge representation systems Center for Cultural Informatics, Institute of Computer Science Foundation for Research and Technology.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Ontology Assessment – Proposed Framework and Methodology.
Advertisements

Ontological Resources and Top-Level Ontologies Nicola Guarino LADSEB-CNR, Padova, Italy
KR-2002 Panel/Debate Are Upper-Level Ontologies worth the effort? Chris Welty, IBM Research.
ARCHITECTURES FOR ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE SYSTEMS
An Overview of Ontologies and their Practical Applications Gianluca Correndo
Knowledge Representation
Ontology From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia In philosophy, ontology (from the Greek oν, genitive oντος: of being (part. of εiναι: to be) and –λογία:
Ontology… A domain ontology seeks to reduce or eliminate conceptual and terminological confusion among the members of a user community who need to share.
Basics of Knowledge Management ICOM5047 – Design Project in Computer Engineering ECE Department J. Fernando Vega Riveros, Ph.D.
OASIS Reference Model for Service Oriented Architecture 1.0
Ontologies - What’s all the fuss about? Lee McCluskey Department of Computing and Mathematical Sciences University of Huddersfield.
Prepared By Jacques E. ZOO Bohm’s Philosophy of Nature David Bohm, Causality and Chance in Modern Physics (New York, 1957). From Feyerabend, P. K.
Deriving Semantic Description Using Conceptual Schemas Embedded into a Geographic Context Centre for Computing Research, IPN Geoprocessing Laboratory Miguel.
Where are the Semantics in the Semantic Web? Michael Ushold The Boeing Company.
Knowledge Acquisitioning. Definition The transfer and transformation of potential problem solving expertise from some knowledge source to a program.
About metaphorical expressions The essence of a metaphor is understanding and experiencing one kind of things in terms of another Metaphor is pervasive.
Industrial Ontologies Group Oleksiy Khriyenko, Vagan Terziyan INDIN´04: 24th – 26th June, 2004, Berlin, Germany OntoSmartResource: An Industrial Resource.
Formal Ontology and Information Systems Nicola Guarino (FOIS’98) Presenter: Yihong Ding CS652 Spring 2004.
Ketrina Yim CS260—Human Centered Computing 4/1/2009
Knowledge Representation Reading: Chapter
Philosophy and Computer Science: New Perspectives of Collaboration
Conceptual modelling. Overview - what is the aim of the article? ”We build conceptual models in our heads to solve problems in our everyday life”… ”By.
Foundations This chapter lays down the fundamental ideas and choices on which our approach is based. First, it identifies the needs of architects in the.
Semantic Web Technologies Lecture # 2 Faculty of Computer Science, IBA.
ICS – FORTH, August 31, 2000 Why do we need an “Object Oriented Model” ? Martin Doerr Atlanta, August 31, 2000 Foundation for Research and Technology -
Ciarán O’Leary Wednesday, 23 rd September Ciarán O’Leary School of Computing, Dublin Institute of Technology, Kevin St Research Interests Distributed.
Ontology Development in the Sciences Some Fundamental Considerations Ontolytics LLC Topics:  Possible uses of ontologies  Ontologies vs. terminologies.
1 CS 456 Software Engineering. 2 Contents 3 Chapter 1: Introduction.
Knowledge representation
Applying Belief Change to Ontology Evolution PhD Student Computer Science Department University of Crete Giorgos Flouris Research Assistant.
Of 39 lecture 2: ontology - basics. of 39 ontology a branch of metaphysics relating to the nature and relations of being a particular theory about the.
Ecological Interface Design
School of Computing FACULTY OF ENGINEERING Developing a methodology for building small scale domain ontologies: HISO case study Ilaria Corda PhD student.
Ontology Summit2007 Survey Response Analysis -- Issues Ken Baclawski Northeastern University.
UNIVERSITÉ LAVAL Centre for Research in Geomatics, Université Laval, Cité universitaire, Quebec, QC Canada G1K 7P4 Semantic Interoperability of Geospatial.
Metadata Models in Survey Computing Some Results of MetaNet – WG 2 METIS 2004, Geneva W. Grossmann University of Vienna.
SCIENCE What does “theory” mean? Common Definition Guess Opinion General beliefs Hypothesis System of ideas/statements Scientific Definition A set of scientific.
LOGIC AND ONTOLOGY Both logic and ontology are important areas of philosophy covering large, diverse, and active research projects. These two areas overlap.
Taken from Schulze-Kremer Steffen Ontologies - What, why and how? Cartic Ramakrishnan LSDIS lab University of Georgia.
A Context Model based on Ontological Languages: a Proposal for Information Visualization School of Informatics Castilla-La Mancha University Ramón Hervás.
Proposed NWI KIF/CG --> Common Logic Standard A working group was recently formed from the KIF working group. John Sowa is the only CG representative so.
SKOS. Ontologies Metadata –Resources marked-up with descriptions of their content. No good unless everyone speaks the same language; Terminologies –Provide.
02. November 2007 Florian Probst Data and Knowledge Modelling for the Geosciences - Chris Date Seminar - e-Science Institute, Edinburgh Semantic Reference.
Prof. Adrie J.M. Beulens 2004Slide1 An Ontological Framework for Structuring Process Knowledge for the Process of Model-Based Problem Solving. Reference:
Kherson, May 20-22, Nikolaj S. Nikitchenko Kyiv National Taras Shevchenko University, Ukraine Integration of Informatics-Programming Disciplines.
Introduction to Film and Television Studies Formal analysis.
Architecture View Models A model is a complete, simplified description of a system from a particular perspective or viewpoint. There is no single view.
MDA & RM-ODP. Why? Warehouses, factories, and supply chains are examples of distributed systems that can be thought of in terms of objects They are all.
Lecture №1 Role of science in modern society. Role of science in modern society.
Artificial Intelligence: Research and Collaborative Possibilities a presentation by: Dr. Ernest L. McDuffie, Assistant Professor Department of Computer.
Using UML, Patterns, and Java Object-Oriented Software Engineering Chapter 2, Modeling with UML: UML 2 Metamodel Note to Instructor: The material in this.
Ontologies, Conceptualizations, and Possible Worlds Revisiting “Formal Ontologies and Information Systems” 10 years later Nicola Guarino CNR Institute.
Ontologies COMP6028 Semantic Web Technologies Dr Nicholas Gibbins
A Generic Model for Software Architecture Yun Sang-hyun Rossak. W. / Kirova. V. / Jolian. L. / Lawson. H. / Zemel. T. Software, IEEE Jul/Aug.
Informatics for Scientific Data Bio-informatics and Medical Informatics Week 9 Lecture notes INF 380E: Perspectives on Information.
METADATA MANAGEMENT AT ISTAT: CONCEPTUAL FOUNDATIONS AND TOOLS Istituto Nazionale di Statistica ITALY.
Knowledge Representation Part I Ontology Jan Pettersen Nytun Knowledge Representation Part I, JPN, UiA1.
WP 2: Ontology & Metadata Models ITD
A Normative and Intentional Agent Model for Organisation Modelling
Philosophy and Computer Science: New Perspectives of Collaboration
The Semantic Web By: Maulik Parikh.
COMP6215 Semantic Web Technologies
Knowledge Representation Part I Ontology
Ontology: Philosophy vs. IT
ece 627 intelligent web: ontology and beyond
Ontology From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
VCE Computing Units 1 & 2.
Ch. 2 Fundamental Concepts in Semiotics Part One
Knowledge Representation (Part I)
Ontology-Based Approaches to Data Integration
Presentation transcript:

Background-assumptions in knowledge representation systems Center for Cultural Informatics, Institute of Computer Science Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas Heraklion, Crete, September 24, 2015 Maria Daskalaki

Building Ontology Ontology’s initial objective:Ontology’s initial objective: “ to reduce or eliminate conceptual and terminological confusion and come to a shared understanding” (Uschold, Gruninger, 1996, p. 94). Application of ontology so far:Application of ontology so far: different groups of conceptual modellers and ontology engineers use different jargon in order to describe a certain subject matter.  A “global knowledge network” (Doerr,Iorizzo, 2008) as an unfulfilled dream?

Our point of view implicit philosophical assumptions  Some of the difficulties emerging in the field of KR might be resolved if we shed light on the implicit philosophical assumptions that are hidden within the process of building ontologies. confusions  The first step towards this is to clarify some confusions, which seem to hamper the goal of building a global KR system.

“Retrospection” McCarthy1980: McCarthy=>ontology as a list of everything that exist. Sowa1984: Sowa=>need for cooperation between philosophy and computer sciences on the basis of an ontology. Genesereth and NilssonGenesereth and Nilsson=> “a conceptualization is an abstract, simplified view of the world” Gruber 1993: Gruber=> ontology is an “explicit specification of a conceptualization” Guarino1998: Guarino => “an ontology is a logical theory accounting for the intended meaning of a formal vocabulary, i.e. its ontological commitment to a particular conceptualization of the world”

Retrospection  Despite the great efforts in establishing and developing ontology in computer sciences, they do not seem to meet all the requirements of ontology!

Confusions in ontology  1 st confusion:functions  1 st confusion: functions ascribed to ontology: To maintain the cognitive content of the material represented. To reduce, as far as possible, the risk of misinterpretation of the content transmitted. To allow, via a shared conceptualization, communication between the members involved (users, machines, different fields,different models of KR) in the digital world.

1 st confusion: functions 1 st function: ontology as a descriptive source of knowledge: =>it does not allow for sound and complete reasoning. 2 nd function: reduction of the subjective interpretations: =>two alternatives: either finite computable functions or partial release from the request for compatibility. 3 rd function: communication: =>communication as a one-dimensional act/ communication as interaction

2 nd confusion: Domain According to Garbacz and Trypuz : “the description of the domain of an applied ontology corresponds, mutatis mutandis, to the philosophical characterization of the concept of being”. “In knowledge representation the range of entities which a given applied ontology commits to depends on a particular engineering problem that this ontology is to solve. Thus, its domain […] will contain those entities that in the view of the developer(s) of this ontology we need to posit in order to solve this problem ”. (Garbacz and Trypuz, 2013, p.9)

2 nd confusion: Domain  Domain itself, which is the “physical object” (i.e. being) of the ontologies seems to depend on a subjective factor, which calls into question the intersubjectivity that is one of the main goals of building ontologies! Background-assumption: the “objects” of reference in knowledge representation systems are not the physical objects and their relationships but rather the sphere of knowledge and information, which is independent of physical objects.

Philosophy and KR-systems  Need for reference to an external criterion.  “Dialectical relationship” as a dynamic process which takes into account the real object that is represented and questions the viewpoint of the specific sciences, from which we derive the knowledge to be represented.  Verification/falsification of our categorization.  Ontology as “recipes of Knowledge” representing aspects and behaviors of the objects of our perception!

Thank you!