Gerard,
Thanks for the references. I wasn't able to access the Yago-SUMO page.
Perhaps there is another source for it?
I do have the OWL version of the DBpedia ontology, and that is what I have
been looking at as an indicator of the state of the ontology work. I don't
yet know the relation between Yago and the DBpedia ontology. I am not sure
how well mappings would work - in my experience ontologies are so different
that an attempt to use a "same as" link in another ontology would lead to a
lot of incorrect inferences. It could still be quite useful for
probabilistic searches.
I am still in the process of trying to get acquainted with the DBpedia
ontology, and aside from what looks like inconsistencies the structure of
the ontology itself, there is a peculiar usage:
Using the SPARQL query page, types of birds like "Albatross"
(http://dbpedia.org/page/Albatross) are retrieved as instances of "Bird"
(<http://dbpedia.org/ontology/Bird>), i.e. the query:
{ ?e <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>
<http://dbpedia.org/ontology/Bird>}
returns a list of types of birds. I would expect these entries to be
*subclasses* of Bird, rather than *instances* (the usual interpretation of
the rdf:type relation). Is this an intentional variant usage of the
notion of "type"?
There are, in the type list, subtypes of Albatross, such as
"http://dbpedia.org/resource/Wandering_Albatross";. The page says "It was
the first species of albatross to be described" and should therefore be a
subtype of Albatross, but since Albatross is not in the ontology, it is
listed as having type "Bird" or "Eukaryote".
I am aware that on occasion the distinction between an instance and
subclass can be somewhat subtle - for example, for conceptual works, where
there may be more than one version (software!!) it would seem more
appropriate to consider such works as Classes (types) of thing, with the
individual instances being the physical objects that embody the abstract
work. But that is often not the usage. My interest is seeing to what
extent the Dbpedia can be organized so as to be useful for accurate
inference. The ontology at present is sufficiently small that this is
probably quite feasible, if a reorganization does not break some existing
application.
So learning whether there are existing applications that depend on the
current structure of the DBpedia ontology is one of the issues of primary
concern to me in this regard.
Pat
Patrick Cassidy
MICRA Inc.
[email protected]
908-561-3416
From: Kingsley Idehen [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, December 30, 2011 2:29 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Dbpedia-discussion] DBpedia ontology
On 12/30/11 5:18 AM, Gerard de Melo wrote:
Hi Patrick,
An approach to combine the advantages of both worlds is to interlink DBpedia
with hand-crafted ontologies such as Open Cyc, SUMO, or Word Net, which
enables applications to use the formal knowledge from these ontologies
together with the instance data from DBpedia.
--------------------
I would like to discuss this issue with the person(s) who are creating such
interlinks. Can anyone provide contact information?
The OWL version of SUMO [1] contains some links from SUMO to DBPedia
and YAGO. I originally created those for the YAGO-SUMO project [2], which
aims at an even tighter integration of YAGO and SUMO. The YAGO-SUMO project
had been idle for a while, but I have been working with Adam Pease to get a
new
release out sometime soon, based on the more recent YAGO2 and compatible
with DBpedia.
Best regards,
Gerard
[1] http://www.ontologyportal.org/SUMO.owl
[2] http://www.mpi-inf.mpg.de/~gdemelo/yagosumo.html
<http://www.mpi-inf.mpg.de/%7Egdemelo/yagosumo.html>
--
Gerard de Melo [[email protected]]
http://www.icsi.berkeley.edu/~demelo/
<http://www.icsi.berkeley.edu/%7Edemelo/>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Ridiculously easy VDI. With Citrix VDI-in-a-Box, you don't need a complex
infrastructure or vast IT resources to deliver seamless, secure access to
virtual desktops. With this all-in-one solution, easily deploy virtual
desktops for less than the cost of PCs and save 60% on VDI infrastructure
costs. Try it free! http://p.sf.net/sfu/Citrix-VDIinabox
_______________________________________________
Dbpedia-discussion mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dbpedia-discussion
Where is the very latest Yago2-SUMO mappings resource?
--
Regards,
Kingsley Idehen
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ridiculously easy VDI. With Citrix VDI-in-a-Box, you don't need a complex
infrastructure or vast IT resources to deliver seamless, secure access to
virtual desktops. With this all-in-one solution, easily deploy virtual
desktops for less than the cost of PCs and save 60% on VDI infrastructure
costs. Try it free! http://p.sf.net/sfu/Citrix-VDIinabox
_______________________________________________
Dbpedia-discussion mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dbpedia-discussion
