Re: Topic :> Dynamics Of Ontologies
Jon Awbrey <[email protected]> Thu, 01 Jan 2004 14:34:20 -0500
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.inquiry,gmane.comp.misc.ontology.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
Topic :> Dynamics Of Ontologies 20
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
Example 1. Prognostic Signs And Symptoms (concl.)
Under conditions like those of the present Example, where a preponderance
of the logical qualities come in exhaustive and mutually exclusive sets,
it is possible to improve the format of the model outputs in such a way
that they can be read as simple outline structures that organize sets
of models under the heads of their positive features alone. This is
possible because there is such a degree of redundancy in the given
lexicon that a majority of the negative features have alternative
expressions in solely positive terms.
For instance, dichotomies after the pattern of {laughter, seriousness}
and {less_dangerous, more_dangerous} allow us to express "not laughter"
as "seriousness", "not seriousness" as "laughter", "not less_dangerous"
as "more_dangerous", and "not more_dangerous" as "less_dangerous", all
without loss of information.
Thus, we can pass from the outline of positive and negative features that
was previously associated with Node 5 to the outline of positive features
that we give as follows:
Node 5'. Positive Model -- http://suo.ieee.org/ontology/gif00009.gif
o-----------------------------------------------------------o
| Node 5'. Positive Feature Model |
o-----------------------------------------------------------o
| |
| delirium |
| laughter |
| less_dangerous |
| seriousness |
| more_dangerous |
| laughter |
| less_dangerous |
| more_dangerous |
| seriousness |
| less_dangerous |
| more_dangerous |
| |
o-----------------------------------------------------------o
In this case, the fact that "not delirium" has no positive expression in
the lexicon leads to a minor lack of expressiveness in the outline format,
but this could be remedied in the next draft of theory by placing the term
"delirium" in contrast with a newly added term, most typically, "normal".
Jon Awbrey
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
http://www.cs.bsu.edu/homepages/mighty/history.html
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o