[Person-ontology] KIF vs. CLIF
Pat Hayes
phayes at ihmc.us
Mon Oct 22 09:14:20 PDT 2007
>If you or someone would be so kind, it would be great to see an example of
>using CLIF to model this:
>
>Ontology
>* Alice is a Person
>* A Person is a reusable specialization [e.g. a sub-class] of DigitalSubject
(I have no idea what "reusable specialization"
means, so will axiomatize subclass.)
>* A Person has exactly one hair color attribute
I take this to be synonymous with having exactly one hair color.
>
>Instance
>* Alice has blonde hair
* (Person Alice)
* (subClass Person DigitalSubject)
with the added background axiom to define
'subclass'. (Note, this defines an extensional
class notion as in OWL-DL. For the intensional
notion used in RDFS, weaken the 'iff' to 'if'.)
(forall (x y)(iff (subClass x y)(forall (z)(if (y z)(x z))) ))
* (forall (x)(if (Person x)(hasJustOne x Haircolor)))
using the background axiom to define 'hasJustOne':
(forall (thing relation)(iff (hasJustOne thing thing relation)
(exists (z)(and (relation thing z)
(forall (u)(if (relation thing u)(= u z)))
))
))
* (Haircolor Alice Blonde)
Up to here it is easy, but the next two cannot be
naturally stated in a first-order framework like
CL. Or at any rate, not in a way which connects a
'fact' with the sentence that asserts that fact.
First-order semantics provides no way to make
assertions about propositions or sentences of the
logic itself. However, a CLIF extension we
recently developed, called IKL, is designed to be
able to make such assertions. IKL extends CLIF by
adding the construct (that <sentence>) to name
the proposition expressed by the inner sentence.
This makes it easy to express your propositions,
but the cost being that nobody has yet designed,
let alone implemented, an IKL reasoning engine.
>* The "Alice has blonde hair" fact was asserted by the Dept of Motor
>Vehicles
(AssertedBy DMV (that (Haircolor Alice Blonde)))
>* The "Alice has blonde hair" fact is asserted by the DMV to be true until
>the first of Jan 2010
(AssertedBy DMV (that (holdsUntil (xsd:date
"01012010") (that (Haircolor Alice Blonde)) )))
This last can be done many different ways. Ive
chosen what is probably the simplest, which would
need to be backed up with a temporal ontology
defining 'holdsUntil'. This is routine stuff,
however.
Pat
>
>-Paul
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: person-ontology-bounces at idcommons.net [mailto:person-ontology-
>> bounces at idcommons.net] On Behalf Of Pat Hayes
>> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 10:39 AM
>> To: Schoening, James R Mr CIV USA AMC
>> Cc: person-ontology at idcommons.net
>> Subject: Re: [Person-ontology] KIF vs. CLIF
>>
>> >Pat,
>> >
>> > How easy would it be to transcribe KIF into CLIF?
>>
>> The full grammar of KIF includes many constructions that are rarely,
>> if ever, used (certainly not by SUMO) so let me distinguish 'full
>> KIF' from 'everyday KIF'. Transcribing Full KIF into CLIF is possible
>> but awkward in places. Transcribing everyday KIF into CLIF is easy,
>> in most cases just a matter of minor syntactic substitutions. The
>> only slighly nontrivial issue is the need to re-write the KIF
>> 'definition' patterns.
>> >
>> > Are we really talking about transcribing a given ontology from
>> >KIF to CLIF, or could a translator be created to convert any KIF
>> >ontology into CLIF?
>>
>> A language translator for any ontology. Any everyday ontology and
>> most of the Full (To do a complete job on the Full would require
>> writing a lot of applied KIF ontologies into CLIF using the same
>> identifiers, which hasn't been done yet.) CLIF was deliberately
>> designed to be a kind of 'son of KIF'.
>>
>> > How much is each in use today? Which is gaining more momentum?
>>
>> CLIF (CL generally) is new, so has little established use so far, but
>> this will likely change. Many government agencies in particular are
> > very keen to use ISO standards where possible, so there will be
>> pressure to use CL rather than KIF in funded projects. Also, frankly,
>> CL is just better thought through and more developed than KIF, has a
>> fully stated model theory, better worked out proof theory, and is
>> much more web-compatible than KIF (for example, a URI can be used
>> directly as a CLIF identifier, which is impossible in KIF.)
>>
>> Pat
>>
>> >
>> > Thanks for your continued invaluable insight.
>> >
>> >Jim Schoening
>> >
>> >
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: Pat Hayes [mailto:phayes at ihmc.us]
>> >Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 11:02 AM
>> >To: Schoening, James R Mr CIV USA AMC
>> >Cc: person-ontology at idcommons.net
>> >Subject: Re: [Person-ontology] KIF
>> >
>> >>All,
>> >>
>> >> Higgins Project leaders are interested in learning more about
>> >KIF,
>> >>about applications and usage practicies for it. (SUMO is written in
>> >>KIF.) They are concerned with the cost and schedule of migrating to
>> >>KIF from their current customized version of OWL.
>> >>
>> >> Could we share our knowledge and opinions on KIF. Thanks.
>> >
>> >First suggestion is to use CLIF, which is a KIF-like 'official' dialect
>> >of the new ISO 24707 Common Logic standard. CLIF is simpler than KIF and
>> >much more Web-compatible, as well as having achieved the standardization
>> >status which KIF never achieved. It is easy to transcribe KIF into CLIF.
>> >There is also a standard embedding of OWL/RDF into CLIF which could be
>> >easily mechanized, though I don't know if anyone has written a
>> >mechanical translator yet. Common Logic also has an XML syntax (XCL)
>> >which might be useful.
>> >
>> >Pat
>> >
>> >>
>> >>Jim Schoening
>> >>_______________________________________________
>> >>Person-ontology mailing list
>> >>Person-ontology at idcommons.net
>> >>http://idcommons.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/person-ontology
>> >
>> >
>> >--
>> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 home
>> >40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office
>> >Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax
>> >FL 32502 (850)291 0667 cell
>> >phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
>>
>>
>> --
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 home
>> 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office
>> Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax
>> FL 32502 (850)291 0667 cell
>> phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Person-ontology mailing list
>> Person-ontology at idcommons.net
>> http://idcommons.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/person-ontology
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 home
40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office
Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax
FL 32502 (850)291 0667 cell
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
More information about the Person-ontology
mailing list