isko 2010, rome, 23-26 feb 2010 workshop on levels of reality as a ko paradigm levels, types,...
TRANSCRIPT
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 ?
• How levels interact with other structuring principles ?
Structuring principles in KOSs
• Types• Facets• Levels• (Aspects)• (Dimensions)• (...)
Typesforming “Porphyrian” hierarchical trees of:
genera/differentiae ~classes/subclasses ~BTs/NTs ~X is_a Y
increasing specificity,depth,“level”
Facets
P M E S ...
a.k.a. “attributes”, “values”, “slots”, ...
RT (several kinds) ~X has Y
belonging to general categories:
standardcitation order
Levels. 1
a.k.a. “great chain of being”, “scala naturae”, “emergent evolution”...
X depends_on Y (asymmetrical!)
increasing organization,
often also complexity
series, “hierarchy”
of lower/higher levels
Levels. 2
strata: matter < life < mind < culture (building-above rel.)
layers: cells < organisms < populations (overforming rel.)
[N. Hartmann’s ontology]{
Levels. 3Less 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
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
The problem of priority
Which principle should come first in KOSs?
Do we need• levels of types?• facets of levels?• types of facets?...
Types, then levels
LCC, DDC, UDC: ... 1 philosophy 2 religion 3 social sciences 5 natural sciences
51 maths52 astronomy53 physics54 chemistry...
Epistemological approach
Levels, then types
Brown’s SC,Bliss’s BC1
“gradation by speciality”
Ontological approach
Types, then facets
Colon Classification
each type is an isolated domain with its own facets
Facets, then types
specialthesauri &classifications
NuovoSoggettario:the world is divided into Things, Properties, Activities, Time
Levels, then facets. 1
BC2ICC (recursive facets!)
CRG’s NATO project, ILC
levels are “categoricallyhomogeneous regions”[Poli]
“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]
Levels, then facets. 2
Facets, then levels. 1
Austin’s version of NATO cl.,?Nuovo
Soggettario
physiology under Activities butorganisms under Things...
Facets, then levels. 2Current work in NS [Cheti, Lucarelli et al.]
management <economics>management <politics> ...
Which is management’s place of unique definition?Let’s list each concept only once. Levels provide a useful model:
Activitiesmaterial activitiesmental activitiessocial activities
...
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”
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 theory and sound KOS structure
