# Re: An exciting inference?

From: Richard Waldinger <waldinge@AI.SRI.COM>
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2003 06:48:42 -0800
Message-ID: <3E733D4A.D1FFFA0C@ai.sri.com>
To: "Roger L. Costello" <costello@mitre.org>

```
It might be more convincing to conclude that the Robber and the Speeder could not be the same person, by spatial and temporal
reasoning.  While their sharing lots of attributes will not allow us to infer that the two people are definitely the same, we know that
they must be different people if there is not enough time for them to travel the distance between the two events.

"Roger L. Costello" wrote:

> Hi Folks,
>
> I am seeking a *simple* example that enables an *impressive* inference
>
> Below is the outline of a scenario that is universally understandable
> and would be very compelling if the inference shown below could be made.
>
> The Robber and the Speeder
>
> Let's suppose that yesterday two incidents occurred in Boston - a
> robbery and separately (at a later time) a person was ticketed for
> speeding.  The police officer at the robbery wrote up his report and
> submited it into the police database.  Likewise, the police officer that
> ticketed the person for speeding wrote up a report and entered it into
> the police database.
>
> At the end of the day an OWL tool automatically pairwise checks all the
> reports entered into the police database, looking for any
> "relationships".
>
> Let's suppose that the Robber and the Speeder are one and the same.  If
> the OWL tool could infer that the Robber and the Speeder are the same
> person then that would be most impressive (and would provide compelling
> evidence of the usefulness of OWL).
>
> Okay, that's the scenario outline.  Can someone fill in the details?
> Remember, it must be *simple* and it must lead to this inference:
>
>    The Robber and the Speeder are the same person.
>
> /Roger
```
Received on Saturday, 15 March 2003 09:52:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:43 GMT