Roberto,
Many thanks for your willingness to participate. I am anxious to
get some participation from Europe, since the DOLCE and its relatives
seem to be likely to continue and get some level of use, and I hope if
at all possible to keep what we are doing compatible with or
translatable into a DOLCE variant. If you can think of others who have
familiarity with DOLCE, please encourage them to look into
participating, also. I have contacted Aldo Gangemi and Nicola Guarino,
but they have not yet responded as to whether they have any interest in
this project. (01)
I know that finding time will be a problem, and we will have to
determine what is practical for volunteers with minimal time, until
some funding can be found. The current COSMO-WG list is: (02)
Eric Peterson
Dagobert Soergel
Roy Roebuck
Olivier Bodenreider
Patrick Cassidy
Antoinette Arsic
James Schoening
Gary Berg-Cross
Adam Pease
Barry Smith
John F. Sowa
Roberto Bordogna
Leo J. Obrst
Matthew R. West (03)
Mail list would be:
epeterson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; dsoergel@xxxxxxx;
roy.roebuck@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; olivier@xxxxxxxxxxx; pcassidy@xxxxxxxxx;
aarsic@xxxxxxxxx; James.Schoening@xxxxxxxxxxx;
gary.berg-cross@xxxxxxxx; apease@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
phismith@xxxxxxxxxxx; sowa@xxxxxxxxxxx; bordogna@xxxxxx;
lobrst@xxxxxxxxx; matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx (04)
One suggestion I am making is to start by trying to formalize the top
levels of three or four classifications that are not already linked to
an upper ontology. One of the possibilities I have begun to broach
with other members of the COSMO-WG is for us to start by finding formal
definitions, using one or more upper ontologies, for the semantic
relations in the UMLS semantic network. As it turns out, Olivier
Bodenreider, one of the COSMO-WG members, said that he is actually
gearing up to do just that: (05)
[OB]
>> Lowell Vizenor and I are in the process of re-analyzing the SN (both (06)
>> semantic types and relations) and to align it with upper-level
>> ontologies, particularly BFO and DOLCE. This work is just about to
start. (07)
I don't know yet whether the way he intends to proceed will allow
close collaboration, or even whether he is willing to share his results
in real time so we can avoid diverging on the upper ontology. But I
hope that this can be one part of the initial COSMO-WG effort. There
are other reasons for using DOLCE and BFO, as well as OpenCyc and SUMO.
If we can find the time to try aligning the UMLS SN with all 4
ontologies, it could provide us with an indication of the difficulty --
perhaps impossibility -- of finding relations among these upper
ontologies at the top levels. But this alone would not be, I think,
impressive enough to change any minds. What I would hope is that, in
addition to the formalization of the UMLS-SN, we could also try to
align the top levels of the US FEA-RMO and some part of the FEA-DRM,
and some high-level portion of the US-DoD Core Taxonomy with at least
one of the upper ontologies, not necessarily all 4. I don't think we
can muster enough time for all this work, but it would be a goal toward
which we might aim. And Brand Niemann is under pressure to support the
FEA-DRM effort, soon.
Some of the 4 already have mappings to WordNet, which we might want
to verify to be sure they conform to the intention of the COSMO
interpretation.
If the COSMO-WG decides that this is not impossible and is worth
trying, this should be a tractable subset of high-level concepts that
will allow us to get some evidence on whether we can find the minimal
top-level ontology that will suffice to unify just these limited but
diverse domain classifications, within the minimal time we can divert
to the effort. It could tell us a lot. This is just my own suggestion
at this time, and we have just begun discussion of this by email.
An issue that will probably arise, but for which I have no
suggestions at this time, is whether we can find some application, even
a simple one, that will serve to begin testing any ontology structures
that we adopt. I presume that one or more FOL or DL logical
inferencing techniques will serve as an initial reality check. (08)
When I get more detail from Olivier as to how he plans to proceed, I
will send a note to the COSMO-WG list. Meanwhile, I anticipate that
there will be other suggestions. (09)
Pat (010)
Patrick Cassidy
MITRE Corporation
260 Industrial Way
Eatontown, NJ 07724
Mail Stop: MNJE
Phone: 732-578-6340
Cell: 908-565-4053
Fax: 732-578-6012
Email: pcassidy@xxxxxxxxx (011)
-----Original Message-----
From: ontac-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ontac-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Roberto
Bordogna
Sent: Sunday, October 09, 2005 11:25 AM
To: ONTAC-WG General Discussion
Subject: Re: [ontac-forum] COSMO Working Group -- sign up! (012)
Patrick,
I'm interested in your Common Semantic Model sub-working
group. (013)
Only I don't really know what kind of practical contributions
could I produce in your WG from remote, being based in Europe where
the best thing that I have seen so far, a semantic model developed by a
number of mainly European Corporations, that I had a chance to revise a
few weeks ago, could be characterized - in my opinion - as
oversimplified, compared with the scope of a comprehensive CSM (the
first user and the driver of a modern World-Class Common Semantic Model (014)
should be first of all the USA ambit because of the level complexity
and
of the diffusion of advanced technologies that you have). (015)
So as in IEEE 1600.1 WG, most of the time I remain silent because I
don't like to express just opinions. (016)
If this is ok for your group I'll be glad to be added to your list. (017)
Best wishes. (018)
Roberto Bordogna. (019)
Dr. Eng. Roberto Bordogna
Corso Magenta 32 20123 Milan Italy.
tel 39.02.8690867
bordogna@xxxxxx (020)
On Sun, 2005-10-09 at 04:50, Cassidy, Patrick J. wrote:
> ONTACWG: Common Semantic Model Working Group
>
> One of the sub-working groups of ONTACWG that was formed at the Oct.
> 5th meeting was the Common Semantic Model (COSMO) Working Group
> (COSMO-WG, until a better name is suggested). There were a number at
> the meeting who did not indicate an interest in participating in the
> subgroup who will look into the issues of what Common Semantic Model
to
> adopt, and how to do it; so I would suggest that these discussion be
> conducted by email among the subgroup, rather than by email to the
> whole list. But the discussions will be open, and if anyone wants to
> just lurk and listen to the email discussions about the Common
Semantic
> Model send a note to myself or the list, and your name will be added
to
> the circulation list for those notes.
>
> We have begun to discuss how to approach the question of deciding on
a
> COSMO, so if you have any interest in participating, please let me
know
> ASAP. Members may join or leave at any time, but we will want to
make
> some progress as soon as possible, and some decisions may have to be
> made soon.
>
> Current members of the WG are:
> Eric Peterson; Dagobert Soergel; Roy Roebuck; Olivier Bodenreider;
Pat
> Cassidy; Antoinette Arsic; James Schoening; Gary Berg-Cross; Adam
Pease
>
> If your name is not on this list and you want to participate or
listen
> in, send me a note. There is one remote participant who indicated an
> interest, but the name was not clear over the telephone; please let
me
> know who you are.
>
> Pat
>
> Patrick Cassidy
> MITRE Corporation
> 260 Industrial Way
> Eatontown, NJ 07724
> Mail Stop: MNJE
> Phone: 732-578-6340
> Cell: 908-565-4053
> Fax: 732-578-6012
> Email: pcassidy@xxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/ontac-forum/
> To Post: mailto:ontac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontac-forum/
> Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/ontac/
> Community Wiki:
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/OntologyTaxonomyCoordinatin
gWG
-- (021)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/ontac-forum/
To Post: mailto:ontac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontac-forum/
Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/ontac/
Community Wiki:
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/OntologyTaxonomyCoordinatin
gWG (022)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/ontac-forum/
To Post: mailto:ontac-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config:
http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontac-forum/
Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/SICoP/ontac/
Community Wiki:
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?SICoP/OntologyTaxonomyCoordinatingWG (023)
|