critical errors in Upper Ontology of RDF,OWL,CYC

For those of you who have suffered through my vague
and confused uneasiness over the past couple of years,
let me assure you: my current position is
CLEAR, CONCISE, CONSISTENT.
I will state my position in terms of Cyc's Collection,
but the principle is the same if you use the RDF/OWL Class.

1. There are two very different, "orthogonal" kinds of
relations in a conceptual hierarchy.
a. "vertical property" relations -- isu, iss -- for example
individual isu class;
species iss genus;
b. "horizontal bookkeeping" relations -- ismem -- for example
individual ismem Individual;
Thing ismem Collection;
Thing ismem Class;

2. Note that "Thing ismem Collection;" is completely unrelated
to statements like
Thing isu Collection;  (which is false)
Thing isu Thing;         (which is false)

3. If you run "ke -cyc", you will see that mKE finds a number
of such false statements in the Cyc Upper Ontology.
# INFO: update_knit: cyc context copied from spo
# ERROR: add_unit: same concept(string[20]) <Collection isu Class>
# ERROR: add_unit: same concept(string[33]) <CollectionType isu 
CollectionType>
# ERROR: add_unit: same concept(string[29]) <CoreConstant isu CoreConstant>
# ERROR: add_species: same concept(string[27]) <CycLTerm iss CycLExpression>
# ERROR: add_unit: same concept(string[37]) <Set-Mathematical isu 
Set-Mathematic
al>
# ERROR: add_species: not allowed(string[15]) <Thing iss Class>
# ERROR: add_unit: not allowed(string[15]) <Thing isu Class>
# ERROR: add_unit: not allowed(string[22]) <Thing isu CoreConstant>
# ERROR: add_unit: not allowed(string[15]) <Thing isu Thing>

4. I will post my official "correction"
http://mKRmKE.net/knowledge/cyc/myCyc.mkr
to the official Cyc Upper Ontology
http://mKRmKE.net/knowledge/cyc/UpperOntology.mkr
on my web site tomorrow.

Dick McCullough
knowledge := man do identify od existent done;
knowledge haspart proposition list;
http://mKRmKE.org/

Received on Wednesday, 14 February 2007 07:05:06 UTC