W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-urw3@w3.org > July 2007

RE: [URW3 public] OWL extensions [was Re: [URW3] ... three questions based on the last telecon]

From: Giorgos Stoilos <gstoil@image.ece.ntua.gr>
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 10:12:06 +0300
Message-Id: <200707310712.l6V7C5JK015811@manolito.image.ece.ntua.gr>
To: <mkokar@vistology.com>, "'Kathryn Blackmond Laskey'" <klaskey@gmu.edu>
Cc: <public-xg-urw3@w3.org>

This was not my main argument. My main argument is that we *don't* have
incompleteness in this case. While incompleteness could be handled with
uncertainty logics and while reasoning by taking in under consideration can
improve inference, incorrect information (to the best of my knowledge) could
not be handled with some uncertainty logic, while also even if someone
assesses some height, still the inference could be incorrect.

So I guess it will be good to have a concrete example on how you can use
uncertainty logics to handle these out-of-date values. 

-gstoil

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mitch Kokar [mailto:mkokar@vistology.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2007 3:13 AM
> To: 'Giorgos Stoilos'; 'Kathryn Blackmond Laskey'
> Cc: public-xg-urw3@w3.org
> Subject: RE: [URW3 public] OWL extensions [was Re: [URW3] ... three
> questions based on the last telecon]
> 
> Yes, the reasoner will give the answer based upon logical information. But
> humans would behave differently. They would still be able to infer
> something, and they would realize their inference was not precise.
> 
> It all depends on what you expect from a reasoner.
> 
> ==Mitch
> 
> 
> 
>    > -----Original Message-----
>    > From: Giorgos Stoilos [mailto:gstoil@image.ece.ntua.gr]
>    > Sent: Monday, July 30, 2007 5:51 PM
>    > To: mkokar@vistology.com; 'Kathryn Blackmond Laskey'
>    > Cc: public-xg-urw3@w3.org
>    > Subject: RE: [URW3 public] OWL extensions [was Re: [URW3]
>    > ... three questions based on the last telecon]
>    >
>    >
>    > > -----Original Message-----
>    > > From: Mitch Kokar [mailto:mkokar@vistology.com]
>    > > Sent: Monday, July 30, 2007 11:31 PM
>    > > To: 'Giorgos Stoilos'; 'Kathryn Blackmond Laskey'
>    > > Cc: public-xg-urw3@w3.org
>    > > Subject: RE: [URW3 public] OWL extensions [was Re:
>    > [URW3] ... three
>    > > questions based on the last telecon]
>    > >
>    > > The incompleteness here is that the height of the person
>    > is available,
>    > > but
>    >
>    > I don't think this is called incompleteness. This is
>    > called erroneous, inaccurate or wrong information.
>    >
>    > > it is outdated. So one needs to assess what it could be now. The
>    > > resoner
>    >
>    > I don't think there is any logic that could assess this.
>    > The height could be correct could have been grown to 1, 2,
>    > 3,... cm could have even reduced if someone is grows very
>    > old or has stopped playing basketball.
>    >
>    > > (current) will fail because the height for today is not
>    > available.
>    >
>    > The reasoner will not fail. It will only provide a
>    > conclusion based on what the human has told him is true at
>    > the current stage.
>    >
>    > -gstoil
>    >
>    > >
>    > > ==Mitch
>    > >
>    > >
>    > >    > -----Original Message-----
>    > >    > From: Giorgos Stoilos [mailto:gstoil@image.ece.ntua.gr]
>    > >    > Sent: Monday, July 30, 2007 4:19 PM
>    > >    > To: mkokar@vistology.com; 'Kathryn Blackmond Laskey'
>    > >    > Cc: public-xg-urw3@w3.org
>    > >    > Subject: RE: [URW3 public] OWL extensions [was Re: [URW3]
>    > >    > ... three questions based on the last telecon]
>    > >    >
>    > >    >
>    > >    >
>    > >    > > -----Original Message-----
>    > >    > > From: public-xg-urw3-request@w3.org
>    > >    > > [mailto:public-xg-urw3-request@w3.org]
>    > >    > > On Behalf Of Mitch Kokar
>    > >    > > Sent: Monday, July 30, 2007 9:01 PM
>    > >    > > To: 'Kathryn Blackmond Laskey'; 'Giorgos Stoilos'
>    > >    > > Cc: public-xg-urw3@w3.org
>    > >    > > Subject: RE: [URW3 public] OWL extensions [was Re:
>    > >    > [URW3] ... three
>    > >    > > questions based on the last telecon]
>    > >    > >
>    > >    > >
>    > >    > > I thought that this was a very good example of the case
>    > >    > where there is
>    > >    > > some information, but even if it is in a precise form,
>    > >    > due to the
>    > >    > > incompleteness, the inference engine cannot
>    > figure out what the
>    > >    > > current height of the person is. In that case, the
>    > >    > inference engine,
>    > >    > > if it could handle uncertainty, could return some
>    > value with a
>    > >    > > qualification on the certainty of the result.
>    > >    > > On the other hand, if the inference engine cannot handle
>    > >    > uncertainty,
>    > >    > > all it can do is just say "I don't know".
>    > >    > >
>    > >    >
>    > >    > I don't see any incompleteness here. The DB either has
>    > >    > some height from the interval [10,230] or it does not
>    > >    > (contains null).  Now if the measurement is correct or how
>    > >    > much accurate is it is a different story, which as said in
>    > >    > previous mails it is not that significant for this use case.
>    > >    >
>    > >    > -gstoil
>    > >    >
>    > >    > > ==Mitch
>    > >    > >
>    > >    > >
>    > >    > >    > -----Original Message-----
>    > >    > >    > From: public-xg-urw3-request@w3.org
>    > >    > >    > [mailto:public-xg-urw3-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of
>    > >    > >    > Kathryn Blackmond Laskey
>    > >    > >    > Sent: Monday, July 30, 2007 7:51 AM
>    > >    > >    > To: Giorgos Stoilos; 'Kathryn Blackmond Laskey'
>    > >    > >    > Cc: public-xg-urw3@w3.org
>    > >    > >    > Subject: RE: [URW3 public] OWL extensions
>    > [was Re: [URW3]
>    > >    > >    > ... three questions based on the last telecon]
>    > >    > >    >
>    > >    > >    >
>    > >    > >    > I agree that inaccuracies in height measurements are
>    > >    > >    > typically not a serious concern.  My point
>    > was that even
>    > >    > >    > so, a person's height could be wrong because
>    > the person
>    > >    > >    > grew taller.
>    > >    > >    >
>    > >    > >    > K
>    > >    > >    >
>    > >    > >    >
>    > >    > >    > At 2:43 PM +0300 7/30/07, Giorgos Stoilos wrote:
>    > >    > >    > >  > -----Original Message-----
>    > >    > >    > >>  From: Kathryn Blackmond Laskey
>    > [mailto:klaskey@gmu.edu]
>    > >    > >    > >>  Sent: Sunday, July 29, 2007 8:51 PM
>    > >    > >    > >>  To: Giorgos Stoilos; Peter.Vojtas@mff.cuni.cz;
>    > >    > 'Ken Laskey'
>    > >    > >    > >>  Cc: 'Kathryn Blackmond Laskey';
>    > public-xg-urw3@w3.org;
>    > >    > >    > 'Umberto Straccia'
>    > >    > >    > >>  Subject: RE: [URW3 public] OWL
>    > extensions [was Re:
>    > >    > >    > [URW3] ... three
>    > >    > >    > >>  questions based on the last telecon]
>    > >    > >    > >>
>    > >    > >    > >>  >...in order for the system to
>    > >    > >    > >>  >return the exact height of each person
>    > and then a
>    > >    > >    > local processing method
>    > >    > >    > >>  to
>    > >    > >    > >>  >fuzzify the heights...
>    > >    > >    > >>
>    > >    > >    > >  > That is assuming the exact heights are
>    > available.
>    > >    > >    > For many of the
>    > >    > >    > >>  problems we are concerned about, there will be
>    > >    > values in the
>    > >    > >    > >>  database, but we cannot assume they are correct.
>    > >    > >    > >
>    > >    > >    > >I see that this is the case in other types of
>    > >    > >    > applications, like situation
>    > >    > >    > >awareness and I fully concur. But I don't
>    > think there is
>    > >    > >    > much to trouble in
>    > >    > >    > >the aforementioned case. There is insignificant
>    > >    > >    > difference if someone 178cm
>    > >    > >    > >is inserted as 179cm or even 180cm in our use case.
>    > >    > >    > >
>    > >    > >    > >>
>    > >    > >    > >>  The database may contain accurate height
>    > measures for
>    > >    > >    > some of the
>    > >    > >    > >>  people, and either null values (height
>    > is unknown) or
>    > >    > >    > imputed values
>    > >    > >    > >>  (a guess or inference based on other
>    > available data
>    > >    > >    > for the person)
>    > >    > >    > >>  for some of the people.  Maybe the
>    > information is out
>    > >    > >    > of date.  If a
>    > >    > >    > >>  person is 19 years old, we cannnot assume that a
>    > >    > >    > 6-year-old height
>    > >    > >    > >>  measurement is accurate.  On the other
>    > hand, if the
>    > >    > >    > person is 30
>    > >    > >    > >>  years old, then the height 6 years ago
>    > is probably fine.
>    > >    > >    > >>
>    > >    > >    > >
>    > >    > >    > >I don't understand your point here. Are you
>    > suggesting
>    > >    > >    > that uncertainty
>    > >    > >    > >could solve these issues?
>    > >    > >    > >
>    > >    > >    > >-gstoil
>    > >    > >    > >
>    > >    > >    > >>  K
>    > >    > >    >
>    > >    > >    >
>    > >    > >
>    > >    >
>    > >    >
>    > >    >
>    >
>    >
>    >
Received on Tuesday, 31 July 2007 07:12:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 30 April 2008 09:52:44 GMT