1 / 21

ISKO 2010, Rome, 23-26 Feb 2010 Workshop on Levels of reality as a KO paradigm

ISKO 2010, Rome, 23-26 Feb 2010 Workshop on Levels of reality as a KO paradigm. Levels, types, facets: three structural principles for KO Claudio Gnoli (University of Pavia). Levels of reality. How levels are used as a structuring principle in KOSs ?

jacoba
Download Presentation

ISKO 2010, Rome, 23-26 Feb 2010 Workshop on Levels of reality as a KO paradigm

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ISKO 2010, Rome, 23-26 Feb 2010Workshop on Levels of reality as a KO paradigm Levels, types, facets: three structural principles for KO Claudio Gnoli (University of Pavia)

  2. Levels of reality • How levels are used as a structuring principle in KOSs ? • How levels interact with other structuring principles ?

  3. Structuring principles in KOSs • Types • Facets • Levels • (Aspects) • (Dimensions) • (...)

  4. Types forming “Porphyrian” hierarchical trees of: genera/differentiae ~ classes/subclasses ~ BTs/NTs ~ X is_a Y increasing specificity, depth, “level”

  5. Facets a.k.a. “attributes”, “values”, “slots”, ... RT (several kinds) ~ X has Y belonging to general categories: P M E S ... standard citation order

  6. Levels. 1 a.k.a. “great chain of being”, “scala naturae”, “emergent evolution”... X depends_on Y (asymmetrical!) increasing organization, often also complexityseries, “hierarchy”  of lower/higher levels

  7. Levels. 2 { strata: matter < life < mind < culture (building-above rel.) layers: cells < organisms < populations (overforming rel.) [N. Hartmann’s ontology]

  8. Levels. 3 Less often acknowledged in KO, still common, especially for main classes: • Roget’s Thesaurus • Brown’s Subject Classification • Richardson’s classification theory [Dousa, this conf.] • Bliss’s Bibliographic Classification • Wåhlin’s Universal System • Scheele’s Universal Facet Classification • Dahlberg’s Information Coding Classification Explicitly acknowledged by D.J. Foskett for CRG’s NATO project of a phenomenon classification, resumed by the ILC project

  9. Levels. 4 produce arrays (ordered sets) of main classes: ... physics < chemistry < biology < sociology ... or of subclasses: morphemes < words < phrases < sentences < discourses families < groups < cities < nations < int. org.s

  10. The problem of priority Which principle should come first in KOSs? Do we need • levels of types? • facets of levels? • types of facets?...

  11. Types, then levels LCC, DDC, UDC: ... 1 philosophy 2 religion 3 social sciences 5 natural sciences 51 maths 52 astronomy 53 physics 54 chemistry ... Epistemological approach

  12. Levels, then types Brown’s SC, Bliss’s BC1 “gradation by speciality” Ontological approach

  13. Types, then facets Colon Classification each type is an isolated domain with its own facets

  14. Facets, then types special thesauri & classifications Nuovo Soggettario: the world is divided into Things, Properties, Activities, Time

  15. Levels, then facets. 1 BC2 ICC (recursive facets!) CRG’s NATO project, ILC levels are “categorically homogeneous regions”[Poli]

  16. Levels, then facets. 2 “Mr Foskett suggested that Energy isolates for a general classification should be sought in the first place in the literature dealing with a particular Thing. It might be found that a given activity was associated [...] with all Things at the same integrative level, or even with all Things at all levels. Only the last should be regarded as isolates in the category of Activities [...]. Each such differential Activity might be placed in linear order before the single Thing, group or level of Things with which it was exclusively associated” [CRG 1961]

  17. Facets, then levels. 1 Austin’s version of NATO cl., ?Nuovo Soggettario physiology under Activities but organisms under Things...

  18. Facets, then levels. 2 Current work in NS [Cheti, Lucarelli et al.] management <economics> management <politics> ... Which ismanagement’s place of unique definition? Let’s list each concept only once. Levels provide a useful model: Activities material activities mental activities social activities ...

  19. KO evolution? • Types are the most classical principle in KO • Facets are now also classical • Levels have been acknowledged later, but often act implicitly,already since “scala naturae”

  20. Conclusions • New KOSs, including ontologies,show poor awareness of levels • exception: General Formal Ontology [Herre et al. 2006] • Explicit analysis of levelscontributes to both KO theoryand sound KOS structure

  21. ...thank you comments welcome <gnoli@aib.it> from <flickr.com/photos/_leonid/277933222>

More Related