- From: Giorgos Stoilos <gstoil@image.ece.ntua.gr>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 14:43:32 +0300
- To: "'Kathryn Blackmond Laskey'" <klaskey@gmu.edu>
- Cc: <public-xg-urw3@w3.org>
> -----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 Maybe the information is out of date.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 Monday, 30 July 2007 11:43:58 UTC