Hi Christian-Emil, I think the definition in Meghini & Doerr sounds opaque because the bit "that is weak shortcuts on the inverse properties“ got lost here. It mixes up inverse properties and inverse shortcuts. Something like this would be fine:
inverse weak shortcuts, in which an instance of the shortcut property implies an instance of each of the properties on the shortcut path Best, Wolfgang > Am 27.10.2022 um 14:16 schrieb Christian-Emil Smith Ore via Crm-sig > <[email protected]>: > > Dear all, > Some starting points: > > weak inverse is a somewhat opaque term. The defintion in Meghini & Doerr is > not clear: > "inverse weak shortcuts, that is weak shortcuts on the inverse properties, > and therefore in them an instance of the shortcut property implies an > instance of each of the properties on the shortcut path" > > As far as I understand a "weak inverse" shortcut is a shortcut where an > instance of the shortcut property implies the existence of an instance of > the long path. > > The example of a weak inverse property in Meghini & Doerr is dated: > P53 has former or current location: inverse weak > From E18 Physical Thing through P161 has spatial projection, > E53 Place, P121 overlaps with to E53 Place > > From v 6.2.8 E18 Physical Thing is no longer a subclass of E92 Spacetime > Volume. So the long path becomes longer. > > P53 has former or current location: > From E18 Physical Thing.P196 defines: E92 Spacetime Volume. P161 has spatial > projection: E53 Place.P121 overlaps with:E53 Place > > Is this a weak inverse shortcut? Can the long path be inferred from an > instance of the shortcut property inside the frame of an actual KB? > > From the introduction to CRM (v.7.2.1): > Some properties are declared as shortcuts of longer, more comprehensively > articulated paths that connect the same domain and range classes as the > shortcut property via one or more intermediate classes. For example, the > property E18 Physical Thing. P52 has current owner (is current owner of): E39 > Actor, is a shortcut for a fully articulated path from E18 Physical Thing > through E8 Acquisition to E39 Actor. An instance of the fully-articulated > path always implies an instance of the shortcut property. However, the > inverse may not be true; an instance of the fully-articulated path cannot > always be inferred from an instance of the shortcut property inside the frame > of the actual KB > > Best, > Christian-Emil > > > > > > > > From: Crm-sig <[email protected]> on behalf of Wolfgang Schmidle > via Crm-sig <[email protected]> > Sent: 19 October 2022 18:25 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Crm-sig] Are there "weak inverse" shortcuts? > > Aha, this belongs to issue 613. I didn’t see it before. > > > > Am 19.10.2022 um 16:59 schrieb Wolfgang Schmidle via Crm-sig > > <[email protected]>: > > > > And another one: Are there really no "weak inverse" shortcuts? > > > > Meghini & Doerr 2018 argue that weak inverse shortcuts are possible, > > although their example looks a little artificial: > > > > E18 Physical Thing P53 has former or current location E53 Place > > implies > > E18 Physical Thing P161 has spatial projection E53 Place P121 overlaps with > > E53 Place > > > > The CIDOC CRM document, on the other hand, says: "An instance of the > > fully-articulated path always implies an instance of the shortcut > > property." So, there seems to be a change of opinion after 2018. > > > > But this FOL expression that can be spotted in the wild looks to me like an > > example of a weak inverse shortcut: > > > > E70 Thing P101 had as general use E55 Type > > E70 Thing P16i was used for E7 Activity P2 has type E55 Type > > P101(x,y) ⇒ (∃z) [E7(z) ∧ P16i(x,z) ∧ P2(z,y)] > > > > The P101 scope note mentions it only indirectly ("This property associates > > an instance of E70 Thing with an instance of E55 Type that describes the > > type of use that it was actually employed for"), but I assume it is indeed > > ⇒ and not ⇔. > > > > Best, > > Wolfgang > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Crm-sig mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig > > > _______________________________________________ > Crm-sig mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig > _______________________________________________ > Crm-sig mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig _______________________________________________ Crm-sig mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
