W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > May 2009

Re: RDF: a suitable NLP KB representation (Was: Owning URIs (Was: Yet Another LOD cloud browser))

From: Adrian Walker <adriandwalker@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 17:54:58 -0400
Message-ID: <1e89d6a40905191454i52bf1007me74b85548dc94c7b@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sherman Monroe <sdmonroe@gmail.com>
Cc: Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
Hi Sherman --

You may be interested in the system online at the site below.

In particular, the approach in the example


may be useful.

Apologies if you have seen this before, and thanks for comments.

                                                    -- Adrian

Internet Business Logic
A Wiki and SOA Endpoint for Executable Open Vocabulary English over SQL and
Online at www.reengineeringllc.com    Shared use is free

Adrian Walker
Phone: USA 860 830 2085

On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 4:32 PM, Sherman Monroe <sdmonroe@gmail.com> wrote:

> David said:
>> I didn't quite express myself clearly. If you were to take the previous
>> sentence ("I didn't quite express myself clearly"), and encode it in RDF,
>> what would you get? It certainly is something that I said about "the thing",
>> the thing being vaguely what I tried to explain before (how do you mint a
>> URI for that?). The point is that using RDF or whatever other non-natural
>> language structured data representation, you cannot practically represent
>> "the things people say about the thing" in the majority of real-life cases.
>> You can only express a very tiny subset of what can be said in natural
>> language.
> First off: I began as a NLP researcher seeking the holiest of holy-grails,
> a method and accompaning knowledge representation formalism with enough
> semantic rigor to encapsulate any NL statements or expression. What came out
> of that work was the Cypher transcoder <http://cypher.monrai.com>. When I
> was first intro'd to the RDF (circa 1999), and when I saw the triple format,
> it reminded me of predicate calculus (which in my opinion failed the above
> criteria), and so I turned my noise up at it (and called TimBL a *lunatic*if I recall), and decided to just work on the NL processing side (i.e.
> extracting semantics from NL phrase structure) and shelf the knowledge
> representation side 'til later (i.e. how to serialize the semantics once
> extracted). Then four years or so later (circa 2003), I made enough headway
> on the input processing side to turn attention again to the output/knowledge
> representation side. That's when I was turned on to Frame Semantics, which I
> immediately praised, it is by far the most expressive and elegant knowledge
> representation framework for NL I have come across (although, it's been 3 or
> 4 years since I really looked). In short, frame semantics sees all sentences
> as a "scene" (like a movie scene) and the nouns all play "roles" in that
> scene. E.g. a boy eating is involved in a ConsumeFood scene, and the actors
> are the boy, the utensil he uses, the food, the chair he sits in. So I
> choose framesemantics as the KB model for Cypher grammar parser output.
> This sent off lightbulbs for me, I went back to RDF, and saw that, low and
> behold, frames can be represented as RDF, the scene types being classes, a
> scene instance (i.e. the thing representing a complete sentence) being the
> subject, the property is the role, and the object is the thing playing that
> role, e.g:
> EatFrame023  rdf:type  mlo:EatFrame
> EatFrame023  mlo:eater  someschema:URIForJohn
> EatFrame023  utensil  someschema:JohnFavoriteSpoon
> EatFrame023  mlo:seatedAt  _:anonChair
> EatFrame023  foaf:location  someschema:JohnsLivingRoom
> EatFrame023  someschema:time  _:01122
> EatFrame023  truthval  "false"^booleanValueType
> dbpedia:Heroes(Series) rdf:type dbpedia:TVShow
> dbpedia:Heroes(Series) dbpedia:showtime _:01122
> _:01122 rdf:type types:TimeSpan
> _:01122 types:startHour "20"^num:PositiveInteger
> _:01122 types:startMinutes "00"^num:PositiveInteger
> _:01122 types:endHour "21"^num:PositiveInteger
> _:01122 types:endMinutes "00"^num:PositiveInteger
> _:01122 types:timezone "EST"
> This says: *No, John didn't eat in a sandwich in a chair in his living
> room using his favorite spoon, during the TV show Heroes*. Do you still
> believe RDF is incapable of expressing complex NL statements?
> Second off: Even though RDF (when married with frame semantics) is capable
> of expressing very complex NL sentences, it was never the intention of the
> Semantic Web forerunners to create a framework for doing so, and I do not
> believe that this capacity is nessassary to make RDF valuable. The question
> RDF answers is fundamentally: *What happens if all the worlds databases
> (e.g. Oracle, Mysql, etc databases out there) could be directly connected to
> one another in a large global network, all sharing one massive, distributed
> schema, and people were able to send queries to that network using a
> Esperanto for SQL?* The ability of RDF to represent (not sentences but)
> rows and columns of any database schema imaginable means it can deliver this
> vision, and the value tied to it.
>> This affects how people conceptualize and use this medium. If I hear a URI
>> on TV, would I be motivated enough to type it into some browser when what I
>> get back looks like an engineering spec sheet, but worse--with different
>> rows from different sources, forcing me to derive the big picture myself,
>>   urn:sdajfdadjfai324829083742983:sherman_monroe
>>      name: Sherman Monroe (according to foo.com)
>>      age: __ (according to bar.com)
>>      age: ___ (according to bar2.com)
>>      nationality: __ (according to baz.com)
>>      ...
>> rather than, say, a natural language essay that conveys a coherent
>> opinion, or a funny video?
> Then it seems you're still not a convert :) As for me, your example here
> has very obvious value. Remember what WWW did for humans and the huge
> revolution that came with giving people access to what other people in the
> world were saying no matter where in the world they were, and no matter what
> langauge the host machine spoke natively. The SW is doing that all over
> again... but for machines this time.
> User empowerment is a large external benefit of the SW, in WWW, webmaster
> makes assumptions (sometimes rightly, sometimes wrongly) about what data is
> important and should be shown and how, in SW, user decides for his/herself.
> Additionally, NL will play a big part of cleaning up the UI so that it
> doesn't look like an enginerring schematic :) Again, I reference razorbase<http://www.razorbase.com>.
> Notice the descriptions in the breadcrumbs and descriptions of facets under
> the 'Your query' link.
>  -sherman
Received on Tuesday, 19 May 2009 21:55:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:15:56 UTC