From OntologPSMW

Jump to: navigation, search
[ ]
    (1)
Session Domain Specific Needs for Context
Duration 1.5 hour90 minute
5,400 second
0.0625 day
Date/Time Jan 24 2018 17:00 GMT
9:00am PST/12:00pm EST
5:00pm GMT/6:00pm CET
Convener DavidWhitten and Ravi Sharma

Contents

Ontology Summit 2018 Domain Specific Needs for Context Session 1     (2)

Agenda     (2A)

Conference Call Information     (2B)

    • Instructions: once you got access to the page, click on the "settings" button, and identify yourself (by modifying the Name field from "anonymous" to your real name, like "JaneDoe").     (2B5A)
    • You can indicate that you want to ask a question verbally by clicking on the "hand" button, and wait for the moderator to call on you; or, type and send your question into the chat window at the bottom of the screen.     (2B5B)
  • This session, like all other Ontolog events, is open to the public. Information relating to this session is shared on this wiki page.     (2B6)
  • Please note that this session may be recorded, and if so, the audio archive is expected to be made available as open content, along with the proceedings of the call to our community membership and the public at-large under our prevailing open IPR policy.     (2B7)

Attendees     (2C)

Proceedings     (2D)

[11:55] KenBaclawski: [1] is a paper on situation awareness and context by Odd Erik Gundersen     (2D1)

[12:08] KenBaclawski: I have given several talks on Situation Awareness at Ontology Summits and other venues. See [2].     (2D2)

[12:08] janet singer: Terms and notions related to ontologies and 'context in context' to be clarified for communique: ontologies, contexts, situations, integration, interoperability     (2D3)

[12:10] janet singer: The paper Ken posted on reseachgate [3]     (2D4)

[12:11] Gary Berg-Cross: Topic is how to include and leverage prior summit ideas in the current summit.     (2D5)

[12:11] Gary Berg-Cross: 1 thing is to have topic co-champions include prior summit knowledge in their synthesis.     (2D6)

[12:12] Gary Berg-Cross: Can we set up the wiki to capture this LT knowledge?     (2D7)

[12:13] Gary Berg-Cross: Curator role or archivist needed.     (2D8)

[12:13] Gary Berg-Cross: Can we use the semantic wiki to discuss things??     (2D9)

[12:13] Gary Berg-Cross: There is a large start up effort needed.     (2D10)

[12:14] Gary Berg-Cross: maybe we start with a good template for the wiki     (2D11)

[12:17] Gary Berg-Cross: One could wish for a small grant to do this...and or academics recruiting a student to do this.     (2D12)

[12:25] Gary Berg-Cross: Ken, do we have a wiki page for each topic set up? I wanted to add more detail on our OKN topic, but didn't see a place for this.     (2D13)

[12:32] Gary Berg-Cross: John's most popular work on Google Scholar is a review Philosophy in the Flesh G Lakoff, M Johnson. New York: Basic books15320 hits1999     (2D14)

Extending and formalizing the framework for information systems architecture JF Sowa, JA Zachman IBM systems journal 31 (3), 590-616 is 2nd with 1414 hits     (2D15)

[12:32] Gary Berg-Cross: Are their slides available???     (2D16)

[12:35] KenBaclawski: @[12:32] Gary Berg-Cross Spencer's slides are at [4]     (2D17)

[12:43] KenBaclawski: @[12:25] Gary Berg-Cross I have not yet set up a wiki page for each track. I did this at the last summit, but it was not used very much. I will create wiki pages.     (2D18)

[12:48] John Sowa: Many years ago, I studied algebraic topology, and I learned all about category theory.     (2D19)

[12:49] John Sowa: I like category theory. But these mappings are only possible if these formal mappings can be done.     (2D20)

[12:50] John Sowa: Unfortunately, the great majority of papers about aligning ontologies start with very, very informal mappings.     (2D21)

[12:51] John Sowa: WordNet, for example, has no formal definitions of any kind. But it's the most widely used tool for aligning ontologies.     (2D22)

[12:52] John Sowa: Schema.org is another very informal system that is used to align ontologies.     (2D23)

[12:54] John Sowa: Alignment by WordNet or Schema.org can never ensure that a mapping by category theory is possible.     (2D24)

[12:57] John Sowa: For more info, see Goguen's paper [5].     (2D25)

[12:58] John Sowa: The title of Goguen's article is "Tossing algebraic flowers done the great divide."     (2D26)

[12:58] Gary Berg-Cross: In your examples, like different context for schedules the same as different situations that make for different schedules?     (2D27)

[12:59] John Sowa: Goguen spent his career in applying category theory in computer science.     (2D28)

[13:00] Douglas R. Miles: I find most often Computer Scientists (not necessarily us) feel more comfortable mapping Category theory to Ontologies than the other way around     (2D29)

[13:00] John Sowa: The only people who paid attention are mathematicians who published papers in journals that no practitioner would ever read.     (2D30)

[13:00] Douglas R. Miles: Somehow, one or the other camps often feel the other is a wart     (2D31)

[13:01] Douglas R. Miles: But category theorists have at least signed up for Ontological engineering .. where most haven't     (2D32)

[13:03] Douglas R. Miles: (btw i am speaking in general.. i don't think any OEs feel CT is a wart on the other)     (2D33)

[13:05] Douglas R. Miles: The thing I hope to see (much sooner than never) is that Programmers use Ontology to keep their Program's semantics organized.. CT is the first step     (2D34)

[13:06] John Sowa: Douglas, please read Goguen's article.     (2D35)

[13:06] Douglas R. Miles: its open.. will do     (2D36)

[13:06] Gary Berg-Cross: The original Q was "How can we build ontologies from a given context?" Given the briefing I'm still unclear of what context you started with. Just a situation of object related??     (2D37)

[13:08] Gary Berg-Cross: Every diagram represents a domain which can be used to define a domain context/environment?     (2D38)

[13:14] Douglas R. Miles: when an application is doing specific things using specific models .. we might frame that as a context for all purposes     (2D39)

[13:14] Douglas R. Miles: (for all our purposes when talking about contexts)     (2D40)

[13:16] John Sowa: What button for unmute?     (2D41)

[13:17] Douglas R. Miles: idly recalls a paper linking category theory to Plato's theory of forms ("Category Theory and Concrete Universals" by David P. Ellerman in 1998-05 at [6]), fwiw     (2D42)

[13:19] Gary Berg-Cross: John on lower right and audio off or on toggle.     (2D43)

[13:21] Douglas R. Miles: Yes, John is is hard work even once you know what you are doing!     (2D44)

[13:27] Gary Berg-Cross: "Ontology matching: A literature review." Expert Systems with Applications 42.2 (2015): 949-971. Lorena Otero-Cerdeira, Francisco J. Rodríguez-Martínez, Alma Gómez-Rodríguez, [7]     (2D45)

[13:27] Douglas R. Miles: hrrm so John is saying CT->Ontology always makes sense     (2D46)

[13:28] Douglas R. Miles: Ontology -> CT .. sometimes is crazy     (2D47)

[13:29] Douglas R. Miles: (sometimes gets crazy and it would be better to take smallest bites as what is useful)     (2D48)

[13:30] Douglas R. Miles: For sure a CT is an Ontology     (2D49)

[13:32] Douglas R. Miles: (an application defined in CT is always the proper sized mid level ontology)     (2D50)

[13:32] David Whitten: So Ken, please share your tool.     (2D51)

[13:32] Gary Berg-Cross: Have to go, see you on the Forum.     (2D52)

[13:33] David Whitten: Doug, can you call me? (713)-870-3834 ...     (2D53)

[13:33] Douglas R. Miles: Can do in about 20 minutes     (2D54)

[13:34] David Whitten: Thanks Ken!     (2D55)

Resources     (2E)

Previous Meetings     (2F)


Next Meetings     (2G)