Difference between revisions of "SWAO:Conference Call 20220114"
From IAOA Wiki
Arwesterinen (talk | contribs) (Initial input of minutes) |
Arwesterinen (talk | contribs) m |
||
| Line 48: | Line 48: | ||
* Discussion of upper ontologies migrated to a discussion of the use of BFO in the IOF ([https://www.industrialontologies.org/ Industry Ontology Foundry]) | * Discussion of upper ontologies migrated to a discussion of the use of BFO in the IOF ([https://www.industrialontologies.org/ Industry Ontology Foundry]) | ||
| + | ** There is concern that all upper ontologies could be rejected due to issues with one (such as BFO) | ||
| + | ** BFO issues include the requirement for realism and the lack of multiple inheritance | ||
| + | ** Committing to an upper ontology means committing to its conceptual distinctions | ||
| + | *** These need to be evaluated that they are relevant and consistent with the desired world view for the ontology to be developed | ||
** The majority of the following insights on IOF were provided by ToddS: | ** The majority of the following insights on IOF were provided by ToddS: | ||
*** Development principles for IOF are in harmony with OntoCommons | *** Development principles for IOF are in harmony with OntoCommons | ||
| Line 56: | Line 60: | ||
*** BFO was chosen but the criteria for evaluation may have been incomplete | *** BFO was chosen but the criteria for evaluation may have been incomplete | ||
*** Results from the evaluation included that the BFO natural language descriptions were better and that Dolce was too axiomatized | *** Results from the evaluation included that the BFO natural language descriptions were better and that Dolce was too axiomatized | ||
| − | + | ** Is valuable to understand where BFO is used and where it is used but "worked around" | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
* Discussion of the [https://jbiomedsem.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13326-017-0172-7 MIRO article] | * Discussion of the [https://jbiomedsem.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13326-017-0172-7 MIRO article] | ||
Revision as of 03:49, 31 January 2022
| Number | 95 |
|---|---|
| Duration | 1 hour60 minute 3,600 second 0.0417 day |
| Date/Time | January 14 2022 19:00 GMT |
| 11:00am PST/2:00pm EST | |
| 7:00pm GMT/8:00pm CET | |
| Convener | Andrea Westerinen |
IAOA Semantic Web Applied Ontology (SWAO) SIG
THIS MEETING TOOK PLACE ON FRIDAY 14 JANUARY 2022. (Meetings have moved to the second Friday of the month at 2pm Eastern Time.)
- We use Zoom for these meetings - details at Connection Details
Agenda
- Actions from last meeting
- RobertR liaison status with the IAOA Education Committee still has not occurred since no meetings have yet been held
- Discussion/presentation of RobertR's ontology definitions spreadsheet
- Discussion of the MIRO article
- Continued discussion of ontology and knowledge graph definitions from the December SWAO meeting
- Posted in this document
- Housekeeping and next meeting
- AoB
Proceedings
- Preliminary discussion about the antifraud ontology announced on the Ontology Forum distribution list
- GAO Antifraud Resource is based on GAO’s Fraud Ontology — "a rigorous classification of fraud schemes affecting federal programs and operations—serves as the backbone for understanding, evaluating, and measuring all aspects of federal fraud schemes, including their participants, mechanisms, and impacts"
- The site provides a user friendly, web-based platform for interacting with the model and identifying resources to support fraud risk management
- This project was overviewed by Leia Dickerson in the 2021 Ontology Summit series
- Question was raised whether this could be more integrated with cyber security
- GAO Antifraud Resource is based on GAO’s Fraud Ontology — "a rigorous classification of fraud schemes affecting federal programs and operations—serves as the backbone for understanding, evaluating, and measuring all aspects of federal fraud schemes, including their participants, mechanisms, and impacts"
- For the next 6 months or so, SWAO will need another individual to run the meetings (AndreaW has several other commitments, as does MikeB)
- Either ToddS or KenB will run the sessions for the coming months
- AndreaW updated the SWAO meeting connection details to reflect KenB's Zoom information
- Discussion of upper ontologies migrated to a discussion of the use of BFO in the IOF (Industry Ontology Foundry)
- There is concern that all upper ontologies could be rejected due to issues with one (such as BFO)
- BFO issues include the requirement for realism and the lack of multiple inheritance
- Committing to an upper ontology means committing to its conceptual distinctions
- These need to be evaluated that they are relevant and consistent with the desired world view for the ontology to be developed
- The majority of the following insights on IOF were provided by ToddS:
- Development principles for IOF are in harmony with OntoCommons
- IOF is less concerned about BFO's requirement of realism and more concerned with 'practical application' for physics and mathematics for manufacturing
- IOF Core to be released soon, with BFO formally embedded
- A release where BFO is "hidden" has also been discussed as a possibility
- BFO, Dolce and UFO were originally studied as options for the foundational ontology
- BFO was chosen but the criteria for evaluation may have been incomplete
- Results from the evaluation included that the BFO natural language descriptions were better and that Dolce was too axiomatized
- Is valuable to understand where BFO is used and where it is used but "worked around"
- Discussion of the MIRO article
Next Meeting
The next meeting will occur on February 11, 2022, at 19:00 GMT/2pm EST.
Attendees
- Ken Baclawski
- Mike Bennett
- Robert Rovetto
- Todd Schneider
- Andrea Westerinen
