Re: fact checking for semantic reasoners

I guess that your 'fact checking routines' are what normally are called ontologies.
The checking part would the consistency check of the available data with the ontologies themselves.
You falled in a self-referential loop :-)
Not to mention that it is impossible to check the consistency of all the available data in the semantic web with the ontologies.
--e.

On 29 Aug 2011, at 13:43, Paola Di Maio wrote:

> Its been a while since I studied artificial intelligence, but
> I remember writing fact checking routines implemented with rules at the time
> were pretty basic stuff
> 
> The way I did it at the time was to model the fact checking routines
> that humans carry out (some professions have specific rules/protocols for fact checking, such as the legal or the forensics professions, other just follow their common sense)
> and all have their limitations, of course
> 
> 
> I am sure the concept can be refined ad libitum
> 
> will send you a link to the paper, and would welcome input/feedback
> 
> 
> P
> 
>  
> 
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 12:17 PM, Enrico Franconi <franconi@inf.unibz.it> wrote:
> 
> On 29 Aug 2011, at 11:44, Paola Di Maio wrote:
> 
> > ha ha, no- the reasoner (or the ontology) would need to check its facts via a simple routine  have a built before it spews its outcome
> 
> This simple routine being?
> --e.
>