Ontolog Forum

Session Introductory
Duration 1 hour
Date/Time October 23 2019 16:00 GMT
9:00am PDT/12:00pm EDT
5:00pm BST/6:00pm CEST
Convener Ken Baclawski

Ontology Summit 2020 Proposals for Overview of Summit


  • The session will continue to discuss knowledge graphs.
    • Our main objective today is to develop an overview diagram for the summit.
  • Suggestions from last week:
  • Video Recording YouTube Video
  • Reminder that Daylight Savings Time (Summer Time in Europe) ends on 27 October in Europe but on 3 November in the US and Canada. So the meeting time on 30 October will be inconsistent.

Conference Call Information

  • Date: Wednesday, 23-October-2019
  • Start Time: 9:00am PDT / 12:00pm EDT / 6:00pm CEST / 5:00pm BST / 1600 UTC
  • Expected Call Duration: 1 hour
  • The Video Conference URL is
    • iPhone one-tap :
      • US: +16699006833,,689971575# or +16465588665,,689971575#
    • Telephone:
      • Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): US: +1 669 900 6833 or +1 646 558 8665
      • Meeting ID: 689 971 575
      • International numbers available:
  • Chat Room



[12:25] RaviSharma: We are discussing John's slides and the Graphic put together by Ken and Janet to depict the concept of Knowledge Graph.

[12:29] RaviSharma: wiki data is an example of very large knowledge graph - from John

[12:32] David Eddy: If you do a Google search you will be ignoring a huge slice of reality that Google does not slurp.

[12:34] David Eddy: Google does not & cannot adequately search software code since software does not play by the rules of human languages.

[12:41] ToddSchneider: Computers do not assume anything. People make assumptions about a computer.

[12:42] Paul Tyson: D.J. Norman reduces OODA to 2 steps: Evaluate, Execute. That could be taken as the universal prototype for animal activity.

[12:45] RaviSharma: John explained slide 44 Tarski style depicting basics related to KGs as Static and its iteration leads to predict

[12:46] RaviSharma: OODA (Todd described) dynamism is 39.

[12:48] ToddSchneider: Ravi, the OODA loop was originally designed for dynamic 'knowledge'.

[12:50] Mark Underwood @knowlengr: Perhaps an unfair complaint, but one would want to be able to accommodate a graph such as a network map and connect it to an asset inventory represented as an ontology. I'd thought this would be handled as a microtheory within Information technology, but the representations here seem to be upper level abstractions that aren't amenable to connecting assets to network graphics using ontologies

[12:50] Mark Underwood @knowlengr: *graphs not necessarily "graphics"

[12:51] David Eddy: But Wikipedia totally ignores, has no access, to huge parts of "reality." Example being... & I asked repeatedly to folks at MIT SemanticWeb meetings business applications that bring food to the grocery stores.

[12:52] David Eddy: @Ravi... surely you're not looking for a SINGLE definition of "knowledge soup."

[12:53] janet singer: Supporting Johns point re knowledge soup: Wikipedia has a policy that Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source

[12:53] RaviSharma: Discussed Knowledge soup concept.

[12:54] Ken Baclawski: The domain is owned by someone, but is available.

[12:54] MikeBennett: Knowledge = Information + Meaning

[12:55] David Eddy: @MikeB.... good to see "data" is not in that equation.

[12:55] RaviSharma: Real world models are probably not very reliable for many areas, yet they are a source like knowledge soup?

[12:57] RaviSharma: John - Knowledge soup can be all artifacts related somehow and an app or other apps trying to communicate about the subject!

[12:59] MikeBennett: @David indeed. One could argue that data is a kind of information (as are marks on paper, waves in air, DNA encodings etc.). Information at its most general is er Shannon etc. - non randomness. Each of these words return different meanings for different people but these are the distinctions I find useful to work with.

[13:01] RaviSharma: David - KS it is at best a heterogeneous concept like alphabet soup that even contains.... many components and unrelated entities apples oranges horses etc.?

[13:02] David Eddy: "word senses"... and remember that professional lexicographers EXCLUDE stuff like acronyms, abbreviations, etc.

[13:02] David Eddy: And just because a LABEL says one thing... the contents behind the label do not have to agree. Consider the issue of "overloading."

[13:05] Mark Underwood @knowlengr: Have to jump to another meeting. thanks

[13:05] David Eddy: Once again... I urge "unnatural language" to be included here... not just ignored.

[13:05] ToddSchneider: Mark, Have you seen the work done at MITRE on cyber-security and ontologies?

[13:06] RaviSharma: John - said follow up Qs are very imp about KGs. Ravi says as was the case for last summits.

[13:07] David Eddy: @Janet... very hard to elbow my way to this table.

[13:07] RaviSharma: Janet - Precision, rigid, irreducible, KGs to be negotiating between HH Comm vs Computerized, consistent formal W theory.

[13:08] David Eddy: HH = ? Helly Hanson?

[13:08] ToddSchneider: David, would 'formal language' (e.g., FOL) be an 'unnatural language'?

[13:09] David Eddy: @Todd... not a clue

[13:12] Ken Baclawski: MetaNet website:

[13:29] ToddSchneider: A function 'ontology':


Next Meetings

... further results