From OntologPSMW
(Difference between revisions)
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
** Knowledge Graph Visualizations by [[RaviSharma|Ravi Sharma]] [http://bit.ly/32oEsC4 Slides] | ** Knowledge Graph Visualizations by [[RaviSharma|Ravi Sharma]] [http://bit.ly/32oEsC4 Slides] | ||
** Semantic Technology Value Proposition by [[JanetSinger|Janet Singer]] [http://bit.ly/2BeWzP2 Slides] | ** Semantic Technology Value Proposition by [[JanetSinger|Janet Singer]] [http://bit.ly/2BeWzP2 Slides] | ||
| − | * [http://bit.ly/362a6HJ Video Recording] | + | * [http://bit.ly/362a6HJ Video Recording] [https://youtu.be/PI-Q3mqfnow YouTube Video] |
* Reminder that Daylight Savings Time (Summer Time in Europe) ends on 27 October in Europe but on 3 November in the US and Canada. So the meeting time on 30 October will be inconsistent. | * Reminder that Daylight Savings Time (Summer Time in Europe) ends on 27 October in Europe but on 3 November in the US and Canada. So the meeting time on 30 October will be inconsistent. | ||
| Line 138: | Line 138: | ||
== Resources == | == Resources == | ||
* [http://bit.ly/362a6HJ Video Recording] | * [http://bit.ly/362a6HJ Video Recording] | ||
| + | * [https://youtu.be/PI-Q3mqfnow YouTube Video] | ||
== Next Meetings == | == Next Meetings == | ||
Revision as of 13:22, 23 October 2019
| Session | Introductory |
|---|---|
| Duration | 1 hour60 minute 3,600 second 0.0417 day |
| Date/Time | October 23 2019 16:00 GMT |
| 9:00am PDT/12:00pm EDT | |
| 5:00pm BST/6:00pm CEST | |
| Convener | Ken Baclawski |
Contents |
- The session will continue to discuss knowledge graphs. (2A1)
- Our main objective today is to develop an overview diagram for the summit. (2A1A)
- Suggestions from last week: (2A2)
- Reminder that Daylight Savings Time (Summer Time in Europe) ends on 27 October in Europe but on 3 November in the US and Canada. So the meeting time on 30 October will be inconsistent. (2A4)
- Date: Wednesday, 23-October-2019 (2B1)
- Start Time: 9:00am PDT / 12:00pm EDT / 6:00pm CEST / 5:00pm BST / 1600 UTC (2B2)
- Expected Call Duration: 1 hour (2B3)
[12:25] RaviSharma: We are discussing John's slides and the Graphic put together by Ken and Janet to depict the concept of Knowledge Graph.
(2D1)
[12:29] RaviSharma: wiki data is an example of very large knowledge graph - from John
(2D2)
[12:32] David Eddy: If you do a Google search you will be ignoring a huge slice of reality that Google does not slurp.
(2D3)
[12:34] David Eddy: Google does not & cannot adequately search software code since software does not play by the rules of human languages.
(2D4)
[12:41] ToddSchneider: Computers do not assume anything. People make assumptions about a computer.
(2D5)
[12:42] Paul Tyson: D.J. Norman reduces OODA to 2 steps: Evaluate, Execute. That could be taken as the universal prototype for animal activity.
(2D6)
[12:45] RaviSharma: John explained slide 44 Tarski style depicting basics related to KGs as Static and its iteration leads to predict
(2D7)
[12:46] RaviSharma: OODA (Todd described) dynamism is 39.
(2D8)
[12:48] ToddSchneider: Ravi, the OODA loop was originally designed for dynamic 'knowledge'.
(2D9)
[12:50] Mark Underwood @knowlengr: Perhaps an unfair complaint, but one would want to be able to accommodate a graph such as a network map and connect it to an asset inventory represented as an ontology. I'd thought this would be handled as a microtheory within Information technology, but the representations here seem to be upper level abstractions that aren't amenable to connecting assets to network graphics using ontologies
(2D10)
[12:50] Mark Underwood @knowlengr: *graphs not necessarily "graphics"
(2D11)
[12:51] David Eddy: But Wikipedia totally ignores, has no access, to huge parts of "reality." Example being... & I asked repeatedly to folks at MIT SemanticWeb meetings business applications that bring food to the grocery stores.
(2D12)
[12:52] David Eddy: @Ravi... surely you're not looking for a SINGLE definition of "knowledge soup."
(2D13)
[12:53] janet singer: Supporting Johns point re knowledge soup: Wikipedia has a policy that Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source
(2D14)
[12:53] RaviSharma: Discussed Knowledge soup concept.
(2D15)
[12:54] Ken Baclawski: The domain knowledgesoup.com is owned by someone, but knowledgesoup.org is available.
(2D16)
[12:54] MikeBennett: Knowledge = Information + Meaning
(2D17)
[12:55] David Eddy: @MikeB.... good to see "data" is not in that equation.
(2D18)
[12:55] RaviSharma: Real world models are probably not very reliable for many areas, yet they are a source like knowledge soup?
(2D19)
[12:57] RaviSharma: John - Knowledge soup can be all artifacts related somehow and an app or other apps trying to communicate about the subject!
(2D20)
[12:59] MikeBennett: @David indeed. One could argue that data is a kind of information (as are marks on paper, waves in air, DNA encodings etc.). Information at its most general is er Shannon etc. - non randomness. Each of these words return different meanings for different people but these are the distinctions I find useful to work with.
(2D21)
[13:01] RaviSharma: David - KS it is at best a heterogeneous concept like alphabet soup that even contains.... many components and unrelated entities apples oranges horses etc.?
(2D22)
[13:02] David Eddy: "word senses"... and remember that professional lexicographers EXCLUDE stuff like acronyms, abbreviations, etc.
(2D23)
[13:02] David Eddy: And just because a LABEL says one thing... the contents behind the label do not have to agree. Consider the issue of "overloading."
(2D24)
[13:05] Mark Underwood @knowlengr: Have to jump to another meeting. thanks
(2D25)
[13:05] David Eddy: Once again... I urge "unnatural language" to be included here... not just ignored.
(2D26)
[13:05] ToddSchneider: Mark, Have you seen the work done at MITRE on cyber-security and ontologies?
(2D27)
[13:06] RaviSharma: John - said follow up Qs are very imp about KGs. Ravi says as was the case for last summits.
(2D28)
[13:07] David Eddy: @Janet... very hard to elbow my way to this table.
(2D29)
[13:07] RaviSharma: Janet - Precision, rigid, irreducible, KGs to be negotiating between HH Comm vs Computerized, consistent formal W theory.
(2D30)
[13:08] David Eddy: HH = ? Helly Hanson?
(2D31)
[13:08] ToddSchneider: David, would 'formal language' (e.g., FOL) be an 'unnatural language'?
(2D32)
[13:09] David Eddy: @Todd... not a clue
(2D33)
