- From: patrick hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 10:00:15 -0500
- To: "R.V.Guha" <guha@guha.com>
- Cc: www-rdf-logic@w3.org
>Pat, > >What you now saying is that so long as they publish the >algorithm/code which they use to derive their conclusions, we will >all be ok ... or is there something I am missing? Not algorithm/code, but inference rules (actually, the whole derivation, I would prefer). It has to be checkable by the reader, and it ought to be easier to check than to derive, usually. The reader shouldn't have to re-derive it, and in any case I don't want to have to check their *code* for correctness. This assumes that there is an interchange format for derivations, of course, which there isn't yet, but I think there ought to be :-). In the shorter term, a derivation could just be something like 'derived using RDFS from <uri of KB> assuming <uri of KB> is closed with respect to <uri of namespace>' which treats all of RDFS inference as a single inference rule. This would be acceptable since RDFS entailment is so easy to check. Pat > >guha > > > >patrick hayes wrote: > >>>You know, someone will want to make temporally qualified >>>statements or (gasp) even defaults. Or maybe some rules to deal >>>with your favorite (the frame problem). At which point, all bets >>>are off! >> >> >>All bets aren't off, provided they publish the rules they are >>using. They can use default reasoning, as long as they (1) say that >>they are using it and (2) say which 'worlds' they are taking to be >>closed. In summary: people can use any proof methods they like, as >>long as they say what they are in enough detail to enable someone >>else to check their conclusions (ie to check whether they are happy >>with the methods they used to derive the conclusions.) If those >>assumptions are part of what gets published as 'input', then we can >>allow people to use any proof methods they like, even something as >>patently invalid as citing an external authority. -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- IHMC (850)434 8903 home 40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office Pensacola, FL 32501 (850)202 4440 fax phayes@ai.uwf.edu http://www.coginst.uwf.edu/~phayes
Received on Wednesday, 29 May 2002 11:00:07 UTC