- From: Jeff Heflin <heflin@cs.umd.edu>
- Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 11:46:37 -0500
- To: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- CC: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
pat hayes wrote: > > 4. I think that semantic search engines will need to be able to > integrate ontologies on the fly... > Ans: Well, I agree this would be desirable, but if that 'integration' > is going to involve finding a logically coherent consensus among > potentially disagreeing agents, then God alone knows how to do it, > and even He might have trouble. However, humans seem to do this kind of integration all the time. We have all seen conflicting viewpoints on the election mess in Florida, and most of us have come to a conclusion (one way or another) about the situation. How we do this depends greatly on our prior beliefs (which sources we trust, consistency with other things we believe we know to be true, etc.). I think that we will need some formal notion of belief systems (a series of rules that order and prioritize potentially conflicting information) to make this kind of integration work. Sample rules might be "I believe that person X is married to person Y only if both X and Y say that X is married to Y", "I believe the Washington Post more than I believe the National Enquirer" or "I believe person X is a faculty member if an acredited university says that X is a faculty member." To reduce the effort required by an individual user, we could make these systems sharable, so that at some point I could say "I subscribe to the Republican Party belief system" or "I subscribe to the Democratic Party belief system" when I ask the question "Who won the U.S. presidential election?" and depending on which belief system I selected, I'd get a different answer. Jeff
Received on Tuesday, 28 November 2000 11:46:39 UTC