[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Trusting the Semantic Web: Facts and Points of View
Hi Jay: The approach is good. The challenges are: o having a trusted RDF system that represents relationships among notions necessary for understanding the facts (the so called concept map) o using news archives or other sources that can be falsified or may contain erroneous information o determining credibility. Again, we are back to quality of source issues; can it be gamed? We deal with this a lot in public safety systems. The change audit controls are fundamental. Otherwise, the local biker gang gets one of there girlfriends on the IT staff and she does the dirty deed. It happens. Who says the SW has to do a better job than human beings: 1. Operational issues. What transactions are automatically committed by results returned? 2. Stability issues: How far and how fast does a commitment broadcast (it's an amplifier)? Or in other words, what is the affective range? Can propagation destabilize the reasoning by introducing false or superstitious facts? We can do the logic but again and again we come back to authority, legitimacy, and quality. The high dollar sources for SW knowledge bases will use standard published procedures to create these (vetted) and they will protect the contents. That raises some other bugaboos of who owns which information and who protects them. You own the public safety data; you pay to maintain it; you have limited access and you cannot update it without going through the courts. Even then, the expungement and purging rules vary among states, districts and courts. Authority, legitimacy, quality of source: all before the first if selects the first else. For example, a very large portion of your police records move through the local, state and federal food chains to reside with the Feds (FBI). How good are they are getting you the records you need when you need them? (Roll on McVeigh). We could assume XML might improve that situation but they don't use it for NIBRS. ***THEY SHOULD.*** But they should also pull instead of push that kind of data. Maybe someday. Goebbels is a known evil and a dead one. He took a lot of folks with him. For more mundane sources, Michael Jackson will do: "The lie becomes the truth. Billie Jean's not my lover..." That is the broadcast problem. Using the semantic web to check a reference will encounter all of the known problems of open text indexing and searching. So the only recourse is the authoritative history that all the suspects have to agree on. Otherwise, the answer should come back: "It can't be determined, but these are the published opinions..." and then it becomes a footnote. The term "XML" doesn't show up until the SGML On The Web group is well underway. That ain't 1994, so the assertion based on the term would return false. The problem is figuring out exactly what the assertion is using perhaps NLP techniques, but it would be easier to ask a human being first. Who sez? Len http://www.mp3.com/LenBullard Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti. Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h -----Original Message----- From: Jay Zhang [mailto:jayzhangsj@h...] For the particular example, semantic web is probably a good solution. If we have a trusted RDF system that represents the relationships among notions necessary for understanding these facts related to the origin of XML: mark-up, XML/SGML/HTML, newsgroup, mailing list, start, subset/restriction, etc. If my machine is powerful enough to parse large number of English sentences into a simple structure like: <assertion date="05-23-99" tone="firm"> <subject>XML</subject> <verb>is a subset of</verb> <object>SGML</object> </assertion> then I can run this system through all newsgroup achives and Web pages to verify assertions such as "XML started in May 1994 at CERN". When contradictory statements are encountered, the system should be able to determine the level of credibility. When a CERN-affiliated individual (again easy to check the affiliation on Web) is talking about CERN greatness, we should assign a lower weight. A voting system weighted with credibility should do. The infamous motto of Hitler's prapaganda chief Goebel (not Goedel) is: repeating a lie 1000 times makes it truth. Who says that semantic web has to make better judgement than human beings? Is it a good thesis project for someone to do a reference checking system over the Web? I expect it to conclude that: "The term XML was first used in May 1994 at CERN", but "subsetting SGML was discussed (by someone not related to CERN prior to 1994)".
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|