1 / 8

Two topics

Two topics. Pat Hayes Florida IHMC. (old) (academic) stuff A theory of space based on cartography. What mathematical model of space underlies our models? Take one off the mathematical shelf (R3, topology, metric space, tolerance space…??)

danielaguilera
Download Presentation

Two topics

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Two topics Pat Hayes Florida IHMC

  2. (old) (academic) stuffA theory of space based on cartography • What mathematical model of space underlies our models? • Take one off the mathematical shelf (R3, topology, metric space, tolerance space…??) • Try to make the fewest assumptions compatible with being able to do what needs to be done … … which in Geo applications is, to be able to represent it by a map.

  3. (old) (academic) stuffA theory of space based on cartography • To represent a space by a map. • This rules out topology (!) since we can map a continuous space using a discrete pixel screen. • Assume a set of ‘locations’ with two relations < part-of d part-of-boundary • Basic axioms: any set of locations has aunique minimal covering location; any boundary part is the boundary of two non-overlapping locations (the ‘sides’) • Map semantics theory based on this can support a large variety of intuitive mapping conventions, eg chloropleth maps, sketch maps, metro maps, driving directions, projections.

  4. (new) (not academic) stuffIKL logic for information interchange • Based on ISO Common Logic (CL) which is itself highly flexible • No distinction between class, relation, individual names • Any term can denote a relation • Can quantify over relations (but is first order) • IKL allows any name to be used in any logical way. Fosters interoperability by removing need to negotiate between uses. • IKL can describe its own naming conventions and relate them to others • IKL has names for its own propositions. So it can describe classes of propositions, variant or contextual truth-conditions for sentences, etc..

  5. (new) (not academic) stuffIKL logic for information interchange • Many barriers to interoperation are artifacts of the inflexibility of our formalisms rather than real conceptual misalignments. (Examples: class/individual or individual/property distinctions in DLs and other ‘conventional’ first-order notations; extensional vs. intensional uses of names; continuants vs. occurrents in describing time and change; modalities vs. parameters) IKL can reduce all of these to simple conversion axioms, all written in IKL, and can relate them to particular notational frameworks. • (CapitalCity UK London 1999)(holds (= (CapitalCity UK) London) 1999)(= (CapitalCity (UK 1999)(London 1999)))((CapitalCity UK London) 1999)(timeDurationOfProposition 1999 (that (CapitalCity UK London))) • (forall ((x timeInterval) y …)(iff (y … x)((y …) x) ))

  6. (new) (not academic) stuffIKL logic for information interchange • (exists ((x Iranian)) (believes Mary (that(and (customer x "Bank Melli Iran") (exists 3 ((y aircraft))(owns x y)))) ))

  7. (new) (not academic) stuffIKL logic for information interchange • Almost any (any?) current KR formalism can be straightforwardly translated into IKL. • OWL (DL) sentences become IKL terms denoting properties: • (= USTripleParent (AND Person (ATLEAST 3 childOf) (ALLARE childOf (SOMEARE attends (AND School (IS locatedIn USA)))))) ) • <owl:Class rdf:ID="#USTripleParent">   <owl:intersectionOf rdf:parseType="Collection">     <owl:Class rdf:about="#Person" />     <owl:Restriction>       <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="#childOf" />       <owl:minCardinality rdf:datatype="&xsd;nonNegativeInteger">3</owl:minCardinality>     </owl:Restriction>    <owl:Restriction>       <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="#childOf" />       <owl:allvaluesFrom>         <owl:Restriction>           <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="#attends" />             <owl:someValuesFrom>             <owl:intersectionOf rdf:parseType="Collection">                <owl:Class rdf:about="#School" />             <owl:Restriction>              <owl:onProperty rdf:resource="#locatedIn" />             <owl:hasvalue rdf:resource="#USA" />               </owl:Restriction>              </owl:intersectionOf>           </owl:someValuesFrom>         </owl:Restriction>       </owl:allValuesFrom>     </owl:Restriction>   </owl:intersectionOf> </owl:Class>

  8. (new) (not academic) stuffIKL logic for information interchange • Context logics transcribe directly, but opaque names are represented in IKL by contextualized names, eg (‘The Prince’ Context2453-A)allowing hypotheses about identity to beexpressed directly: • (= (‘The Prince’ Context2453-A) “Osama bin Laden”)

More Related