[unrev-II] Knowledge Representation 1

From: Jack Park (jackpark@verticalnet.com)
Date: Wed Apr 05 2000 - 07:50:06 PDT

  • Next message: Jack Park: "Re: [unrev-II] Lifestreams"

    At Eric's suggestion, I'm gonna take a shot at it. Thanks also to Paul for
    contributing. This post starts a new thread. There will likely be a
    Knowledge Representation 2 thread, and more. The notion I am putting forth
    is that there will be several aspects to a rigorous discussion of KR, and
    each aspect is worthy of its own thread. Given that design is often
    iterative in nature, I would expect that there could be several threads
    running at the same time.

    My personal approach to design tries to combine a top down, big picture
    approach with a bottom up, fan the flames approach. This post begins the
    top down discussion.

    For a platform for this discussion, I suggest that those who wish to
    participate take a look at the vu graphs built by Dr. Nancy Glock-Grueneich
    at http://www.higheredge.org/mandala1.ppt
    She presented this talk to the EOE group as mentioned by Doug yesterday.
    The talk presents one complete view of the big picture of what is needed:
    she calls it a Knowledge Mandala. In particular, she develops a pie chart
    that depicts the 5 aspects of knowledge. They are:
        Analytical Forms
        Systems Dynamics
        Meaning Constructs

    The first two can be thought to be general in nature. They concern our ways
    of representing the things of our universe and the way we think about them.
    Those constitute the real issues in KR and involve the signs, symbols,
    ontologies, and so forth of the universe we plan to construct. It is at this
    level that we should be concerned with a uniform ontology, one which
    satisfies the needs of a (presumably) multicultural DKR <<that, IMHO, is a
    tall order>>, and the systematics of our universe.

    The second two become more specialized. They concern the ways we make
    meaning (semantics) out of our experiences, and enumerate our specific
    experiences. For instance, Rod Welch (http://www.welchco.com/) has
    constructed a powerful system for enumeration of experience.

    The last is simply the tools we bring to bear. They are twofold in nature:
    there are those tools we have at hand, our skills in the form of wetware and
    our tools in the form of software and so forth -- the routine stuff; and
    there are those skills we bring to bear on problems for which we have no
    specific tools, our critical thinking and problem solving skills -- the
    non-routine stuff.

    Viewing knowledge from within this universe, we should be able to pick and
    choose those aspects of KR we wish to tackle. Given that the DKR is,
    itself, to be an evolved tool, it does not seem necessary to attack all
    aspects of KR at once; we must, however, strive (IMHO) to design with
    evolution in mind.

    So, in the big picture, my view is that we need to choose from among the 5
    aspects of knowledge denoted by Nancy. To start this thread, I offer the
    following suggestion:

    Start with Cases. Here, we wish to enumerate those use cases we wish to be
    able to represent with Analytical Forms, Systems Dynamics, and Meaning

    By starting with Use Cases, we should be able to then -- presumably in other
    threads -- attack the specific issues in Analytic Forms, Systems Dynamics,
    and Meaning Constructs, which arise from specific cases.

    I very much suspect that the approach I espouse here should be discussed
    further, so I would propose that Use Cases be the topic of Knowledge
    Representation 2, a completely different thread, and each of the others as
        Analytic Forms = Knowledge Representation 3
        Systems Dynamics = Knowledge Representation 4
        Meaning Constructs = Knowledge Representation 5
        Applications-DKF = Knowledge Representation 6
        Applications-OHS = Knowledge Representation 7
        Serialization (XML, etc) = Knowledge Representation 8

    I imagine that more than one of these will be running at any given time.
    Those of us blessed with large doses of "fire-em-up-itis" will likely jump
    into some threads long before their time. So be it.

    Remember, according to the thesis I pontificate here, Use Cases will go into
    a thread titled Knowledge Representation 2. Discussions about, for,
    against, and other rants on the approach I am suggesting stay here.

    Thus spake
    Jack Park

    Get a NextCard Visa, in 30 seconds! Get rates
    as low as 2.9% Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR and no hidden fees.
    Apply NOW!

    Community email addresses:
      Post message: unrev-II@onelist.com
      Subscribe: unrev-II-subscribe@onelist.com
      Unsubscribe: unrev-II-unsubscribe@onelist.com
      List owner: unrev-II-owner@onelist.com

    Shortcut URL to this page:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 05 2000 - 07:54:18 PDT