(bridge) Send note to
Paul Prueitt .
(SBF2)
We ask that
comments and discussion on this series be made in the Yahoo
groups from, eventChemistry.
SBF2 –
Ontological Primitives, derived by Sowa and Ballard
SBF3 – Data
regularity within the Ontological Primitives
SBF4 – Mapping Viewpoints and
Differences Between Viewpoints
The Sowa -Ballard Framework 1
One may conjecture
that perhaps the Zachman
Framework is a universal for one class of complex processes, but that other
frameworks exist. Two examples of other
frameworks are the 12 primitive-element Sowa Framework and 18 primitive-element
Ballard Framework for knowledge base construction.
The
Sowa-Ballard Framework (SBF) has the form of an 18 tuple:
< a(0), a(1), a(2), . .
. , a(18) >
Where the value of a(0) is set by a pre-process that categorizes the
event that the Framework will be used to characterize. How these values are set is subject to some
considerations that Ballard (“On the Evolution of a Commercial Ontology”,
pre-print not yet available publicly) is making known and perhaps there are
some innovations that OSI will
make also. What is proposed here is
that human action
perception cycles be enhanced with a tri-level
computational architecture that mimics memory, awareness and anticipation
states.
Suppose that 100 events have been considered.
Domain space = { E(i) | i = 1, . . . , 100 }
The OSI
Framework Browser stores the cell values as strings, and inventories these
strings into ASCII text. An I-RIB exists
that governs the access to the data.
The OSI Framework Browser elicits the knowledge from the human clerk and
then stores this in a convenient way.
A
parsing program then produces a correlation analysis and results in a “derived”
18 tuple:
< a(0), a’(1), a’(2), . . . , a’(18) >
where a(0) is the event type and a’(1), . . . , a’(18) are each fillers
that minimally sign the cell contents. The derivation process involved a reification of the fillers of
the frameworks slots, and this means that a theory of type is developed for
each slot and a theory of relationship is develop between the various
slots.
There is a reduction of a free form of writing to a set of standard fillers
for cells. Over time, the filling of
cells might often be made from a pick list; as long as there is always a means
to introduce new types of fillers at any moment. A type of “open logic”, related to QAT,
governs the introduction of new types of fillers.
The set of fillers for each framework cell (a cell is called also a slot
in script theory) becomes the set of natural-kind that is observed to be the
structural components of the event under consideration. These structural components are the
substance of the events, and the discoveries of relationships between
structural elements are to be viewed using the categoricalAbstraction
(cA) and eventChemistry (eC) OSI Browsers.
Categorical expression is expressed within the co-occurrence of elements of structure and these correlate to functional dependencies between framework slots. The senseMaking architecture for the OSI Knowledge Operating System (OSI - KOS) is then used to annotate these dependencies and to develop first order logics that provide top down expectancies and predictive filling in of slots (cells) that have not been filled in. The slots functional dependencies are rendered visually in the eventChemistry browsers.
The predictive Methodology using cA/eC is fulfilled in a nice way using
the Generalized Framework in senseMaking architecture.
(bridge) Comments
can be sent to ontologyStream e-forum . (SBF2)