Re: It thinks that R1 P2 R2

> > See the comment inline.
> >
> >> Consider the following statements...
> >>
> >> R1 P1 R2
> >> R1 rdf:type C1
> >> R2 rdf:type C2
> >>
> >> P2 rdfs:subPropertyOf P1
> >> P2 rdfs:domain C1
> >> P2 rdfs:range C2
> >>
> >> My engine thinks that
> >>
> >> R1 P2 R2
> >
> > The imaginary engine is not good enough.
> 
> Anything I can do to improve the imaginary engine? In fact, I may use this 
> "inference" as an application in my project. Let me describe here...
> 
> A part of the schema...
> 
> <rdf:Property rdf:ID="connectSignalTo" xml:base="&e;">
>   <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#SignalOutput"/>
>   <rdfs:range rdf:resource="#SignalInput"/>
> </rdf:Property>
> 
> before...
> 
> <gom:Point rdf:nodeID="A0">
>   <rdf:type rdf:resource="&e;SignalOutput"/>
> </gom:Point>
> <gom:Point rdf:nodeID="A1">
>   <rdf:type rdf:resource="&e;SignalInput"/>
> </gom:Point>
> 
> creating a connection...
> 
> <rdf:Description rdf:nodeID="A0">
>   <gom:connectTo rdf:nodeID="A1"/>
> </rdf:Description>
> 
> "think"...
> 
> <rdf:Description rdf:nodeID="A0">
>   <e:connectSignalTo rdf:nodeID="A1"/>
> </rdf:Description>
> 
> "Think" is the only solution I devise for the above problem. The imaginary 
> proposes to the end user that the drawing connection, gom:connectTo, may be 
> a signal connection, e:connectSignalTo.
> 

I can see the situation.

General speaking,  there doesn't exist any neat solution to this fuzzy issue.

Thinking:

What is the sufficient condition to make the assertion P2(R1, R2) true? even if under some precondition such as P1(R1, R2), subPropertyOf(P2, P1), R1 and R2 satifying the domain and range constraints of P2. 


Probability-based reasoning can be used to partially solve this problem, Or

Machine learning, Bayesian network, Neural Network, Or

Soft Computing Technique

[snip]

> >> Jeremy
> >>
> >
> > Yuzhong Qu
> >
> 
> Jeremy 
> 

Yuzhong Qu 

Received on Sunday, 13 March 2005 11:48:41 UTC