- From: Tim Finin <finin@cs.umbc.edu>
- Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 16:42:14 -0400
- To: Kavitha Srinivas <ksrinivs@gmail.com>
- CC: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, Anja Jentzsch <anja@anjeve.de>, "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>, dbpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net
Kavitha Srinivas wrote: > I understand what you are saying -- but some of this reflects the way > types are associated with freebase instances. The types are more like > 'tags' in the sense that there is no hierarchy, but each instance is > annotated with multiple types. So an artist would in fact be annotated > with person reliably (and probably less consistently with > /music/artist). Similar issues with Uyhurs, murdered children etc. The > issue is differences in modeling granularity as well. Perhaps a better > thing to look at are types where the YAGO types map to Wordnet (this is > usually at a coarser level of granularity). One way to approach this problem is to use a framework to mix logical constraints with probabilistic ones. My colleague Yun Peng has been exploring integrating data backed by OWL ontologies with Bayesian information, with applications for ontology mapping. See [1] for recent papers on this as well as a recent PhD thesis [2] that I think also may be relevant. [1] http://ebiquity.umbc.edu/papers/select/search/html/613a353a7b693a303b643a37383b693a313b643a303b693a323b733a303a22223b693a333b733a303a22223b693a343b643a303b7d/ [2] http://ebiquity.umbc.edu/paper/html/id/427/Constraint-Generation-and-Reasoning-in-OWL
Received on Monday, 10 August 2009 20:43:06 UTC