- From: Matt Williams <matthew.williams@cancer.org.uk>
- Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2005 09:52:25 +0100
- To: Jerome Euzenat <Jerome.Euzenat@inrialpes.fr>, W3RDFLogicList <www-rdf-logic@w3.org>
Dear Jerome, Thanks for the reply, and my apologies for not making things clearer. > I am not sure I understand the syntax here, can you paraphrase it? > (how are the Cs quantified? are they constants? I assume the > existential quantifer is on the role R). 1: "exists R(C exists R'.C')" Where the existential quantifier is on the R (and R'), and C (and C') is some Class in the T-Box. > > The two tracks would be to look for Feature-structure (feature > algebras...) and Conceptual graphs (a.k.a, conceptual structures). > > However, both of them do not go easily with negation. The issue here is that CGs are not equivalent to DLs (for a variety of reasons). I have started by defining a metric for the length of the expression, and for the negated expression: 1: C ex. R(C' and ex. R'(C'' and ex. R''.C''')) 2: C not ex. R(C' and ex. R'(C'' and ex. R''.C''')) 3: C ex. R(C' and not ex. R'(C'' and ex. R''.C''')) 4: C ex. R(C' and ex. R'(C'' and not ex. R''.C''')) This morning, I've shown that you could define the length of 1 as 2n-1 (where n=number of classes), to capture the number of classes and properties. We can then define the length of 2-4 as being the length up until the point of negation, normalised by the length of 1. The problem is, this is fairly ad hoc (although it captures some useful intuitions). I have the feeling that I am reinventing the wheel here...but haven't seen anything else that discusses this topic. Matt
Received on Tuesday, 20 September 2005 08:52:41 UTC