Dear both,
I agree:
Inverse weak shortcut = an instance of the shortcut property implies an
instance of each of the properties and classes of the corresponding long
path.
I think the text in "Meghini & Doerr" is simply wrong. The "inverse weak
shortcut" is not a weak shortcut of the inverse property. Weak
shortcuts are neutral to the direction in which the property is read.
The reading direction of the property corresponds to the reading
direction of the long path.
The definition was dropped from the CRM introduction at a time we could
not identify inverse weak shortcuts in CRMbase.
Best,
Martin
On 10/27/2022 5:59 PM, Wolfgang Schmidle via Crm-sig wrote:
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
--
------------------------------------
Dr. Martin Doerr
Honorary Head of the
Center for Cultural Informatics
Information Systems Laboratory
Institute of Computer Science
Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas (FORTH)
N.Plastira 100, Vassilika Vouton,
GR70013 Heraklion,Crete,Greece
Vox:+30(2810)391625
Email: [email protected]
Web-site: http://www.ics.forth.gr/isl
_______________________________________________
Crm-sig mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ics.forth.gr/mailman/listinfo/crm-sig
