• To: "Danny Ayers" <danny666@v...>, "Mike Champion" <mc@x...>, <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: Re: Statistical vs "semantic web" approaches to making sense of the Net
• From: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@o...>
• Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2003 16:54:16 -0400
• References: <BKELLDAGKABIOCHDFDBPIEEOCJAA.danny666@v...>

Danny Ayers wrote:

> You can also use RDF reification and old fashioned certainty factors to
> cross the bridge :
>
> [Nancy hasVirus #SARS] hasCertainty 0.01
>

You could certainly do this, but an OWL  engine wouldn't be able to make any
sense out of it. RDF graphs could represent Bayesian networks but that
doesn't mean that OWL inferencing engines would somehow understand them --
its at this precise point that you would need to invoke some as yet to be
defined -- let alone discussed-- layer of the SW that would understand this
type of logic. My bet would be on some melding of any of a number of
(currently available) statistical processors as input to (currently
available) logical classifiers, and perhaps this would be an iterative
process.

Jonathan

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Statistical vs "semantic web" approaches to making sense of the Net
    • From: "Danny Ayers" <danny666@v...>

• References:
  • RE: Statistical vs "semantic web" approaches to making sense of the Net
    • From: "Danny Ayers" <danny666@v...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Statistical vs "semantic web" approaches to making sense of the Net
• Next by Date: RE: Roger Costello: My Version of "Why use OWL?"
• Previous by thread: RE: Statistical vs "semantic web" approaches to making sense of the Net
• Next by thread: RE: Statistical vs "semantic web" approaches to making sense of the Net
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread