MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Exceptions in Ontologies

2010· book-chapter· en· W2381302819 on OpenAlexaff
Christophe Jouis, Julien Bourdaillet, Bassel Habib, Jean‐Gabriel Ganascia

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2010
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicLogic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAxiomOntologyFormalism (music)Closure (psychology)Computer scienceIDEF5Ontology componentsInferenceClass (philosophy)Knowledge representation and reasoningTheoretical computer scienceRepresentation (politics)Set (abstract data type)MathematicsAlgebra over a fieldProcess ontologyPure mathematicsSemantic WebArtificial intelligenceProgramming languageOntology alignment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter is a contribution to the study of formal ontologies. It addresses the problem of atypical entities in ontologies. The authors propose a new model of knowledge representation by combining ontologies and topology. In order to represent atypical entities in ontologies, the four topological operators of interior, exterior, border and closure are introduced. These operators allow to specify whether an entity, belonging to a class, is typical or not. The authors define a system of topological inclusion and membership relations into the ontology formalism, by adapting the four topological operators with the help of their mathematical properties. These properties are used as a set of axioms which allows to define the topological inclusion and membership relations. Further, the authors define combinations of the operators of interior, exterior, border and closure that allow the construction of an algebra. They model is implemented in AnsProlog, a recent logic programming language that allows negative predicates in inference rules.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.384
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.230 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicLogic, Reasoning, and KnowledgeFrench-language works237,207