Astitva jneyatva-abhideyatva


Published on

Published in: Technology, Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Astitva jneyatva-abhideyatva

  1. 1. Whatever is, astitva, is knowable, jñānēyatva, is namable abhidēyatvaTrends in Social and Semantic Nāgarāju PappuComputing, Dept. of CSE, IIT-Kanpur, 3rdMar’ 09
  2. 2. © CanopusConsulting
  3. 3. Computing & Society – Evolution of Social Applications© CanopusConsulting
  4. 4. © CanopusConsulting
  5. 5. Static Equilibrium to Dynamic Harmony© CanopusConsulting
  6. 6. Content Organization Knowledge models Large Scale Ontology Engineering© CanopusConsulting
  7. 7. Basic stance of ontology is – meanings are entities, events and relations Meanings occur in Cognition Meanings are impressed in cognition & are expressed in natural language impress-meanings recur Ontology seeks entitative account of such recurrence Ontological engineering seeks automation of such account Central issue of ontological engineering is – how to specify meaning for robots or computational agents© CanopusConsulting
  8. 8. Formal Vs.DescriptiveOntologyFormalOntology isReasoningamong entitiesFormal Logic isreasoningamongPropositions© CanopusConsulting
  9. 9. US Library of Congress Top Level Hierarchy: •  Same Metaphor translated in earlyD: History (general) information systems – File Systems,DA: Great Britain DK: Former Soviet Union Hierarchical DatabasesDB: Austria DL: Scandinavia DP:DC: France Iberian Peninsula DQ:DD: Germany SwitzerlandDE: Mediterranean DR: Balkan Peninsula • Designed to Optimize for Space.DF: Greece DS: AsiaDG: Italy DT: Africa • One Entry can only be at oneDH: Low Countries DU: Oceania placeDJ: Netherlands • Who decides the Categories?© CanopusConsulting
  10. 10. • Different functions ? Categories Vs. Tags • Different ways of organizing information, • Different world views© CanopusConsulting
  11. 11. • Expert Designed Directory Web 1.0 • Cross References (One Url can be at most at 3 places) • Storage and linking are delinked Web 2.0 • Only Tags, content is not stored • Community Web Organization of 2.0/3.0 Content© CanopusConsulting
  12. 12. Ontology is Overrated: Categories, Links, and Tags : Clay Shirky© CanopusConsulting
  13. 13. Semantics of Tags and Categories l  Categories are hierarchical (IS-A relationship) l  Tags are associated with a node (Non-IS-A Relationship) l  The meaning of a tag is embedded in its name. l  The supported behavior is ‘association’ l  Web3.0 attempts to support various kinds of behavior other than ‘association’ l  Semantic Searches, Intelligent Personal Agents l  Finding Relationships between various objects© CanopusConsulting
  14. 14. Communities, Cultures and Content l  Current applications are designed for an Individual l  Applications for Community are very primitive l  Variation on To: Cc: Bcc: -- is the only mechanism l  A protocol assumes the existence of a constitution l  How do we design constitutions for community conduct? l  Internet Groups, Communities (Slashdot, Orkut, Wikipedia..) l  Very primitive systemic support for policies and constitution – leads to lots of problems l  What kind of Cultural Mechanisms are required for a very large community to co-exist? l  The Culture of svīkr ti© CanopusConsulting
  15. 15. Letting go of the hierarchy… l  The current generation collaborative applications are so compelling to use where as the Enterprise Systems require a lot of learning, training and are frequently known to be ‘intrusive’ and ‘imposing’ l  Collaboration assumes no hierarchy l  Counter Intuitive – but it is very simple and easy to develop such systems. Computational Complexity is much lower l  Example: No Hierarchical Lock Manager! l  No-fixed, pre-designed, pre-meditated electronic concrete l  The current generation open sources environments, social networking, content management environments give the ‘control’ back to the user. l  Workflow/Process Driven Systems Vs. Content Driven Systems l  The Authorities decide a process l  The user chooses what to do when l  The User is not the ‘Samosa’ consumed by the ‘System’ l  The environment offers various tools to the User.© CanopusConsulting
  16. 16. Enterprise Systems and Semantics • Domain Transformations • Structural Relationships • Semantic Relationships Architecture is Transforming Domain Semantics to Computing Semantics© CanopusConsulting
  17. 17. Semantics and Structures A Structural Specification A Semantic Specification l  Company has Employees l  Company is owned by promoters l  Company has promoters (Power) l  Company has a management team l  Company is controlled by the l  Company has a board of directors management team/founders (control) l  Managers are employees l  Employees are the company l  Employees have name, address, role, (existence) designation, Salary l  Company is engaged in a certain l  Company has temporary staff. business operations. (function) l  Company has a certain number of l  Company needs certain support business units functions (quality) l  Company has a certain operational, l  Company makes profit (causal) support functions l  Company pays taxes l  Consultants are associated with the company. (temporal)© CanopusConsulting
  18. 18. Semantics and Structures l  Structural Specification: l  You give a query – get a result l  Semantic Specification: l  You ask a question, seek an answer l  IS-A and Non IS-A relationships l  Three other Variations on IS-A relationships which are structural l  All others are Semantic Relationships© CanopusConsulting
  19. 19. Example of an Ontological/Semantic Specification How many such Propositions? Are propositions really ‘semantic relationships’?© CanopusConsulting
  21. 21. Verbal Ambiguity: Can describe same state of affairs using different verbs. …search for Universal Verb (sāmānya kriyā)! Greek Indian Māhābhās)ya ‘X becomes Y’ presupposes ‘X was not What are you doing? All verbs can Y’, ‘X will be Y’ or ‘X begins to be Y’ etc. come as answers – cooking, going, staying, knowing etc. But ‘X is Y’ does not presuppose or imply any sentence with ‘become’. na hi bhavati kim karoti astīti – Pātañjali (200BC, on 1.3.1) “It does not happen – what are you doing? I am.” This proves that ‘X is Y’ is a primitive verb which shows up even in the meaning of ‘X becomes Y’ but its asti, vidyate, bhavati atomicity does not permit assimilation being, presence, happening of its meaning in any other verbal form. Atomicity vs. Pervasion ον, being, is a universal verb ‘happening’ is a universal verb© CanopusConsulting
  22. 22. Comprehensive Foundational Ontologies Aristotelian Ontology Vaiśes)ika Ontology relation among real entities are relation among real entities are logical real entities different categories of reals have hierarchy of universals is valid across different highest universal categories of reals ‘Existence’ is a declaration ‘Existence’ is a specific entity Declarative Categories Differentiated Categories Descriptive Ontologies© CanopusConsulting
  23. 23. The Power of the Indian Approaches l  Suppositions and Not Propositions. l  Relationships are independent enteritis, not logical connectives l  Any domain can thus be reduced to a set of very small set of Relationships and Category Types l  Heuristic Inferences is possible l  Quality is an Ontological Configuration of Entities (Dharma and Guna) l  Experiences in Using this Approach l  A universal enterprise semantic network (MCUBE) l  A very large global learning network© CanopusConsulting
  24. 24. Long Range Perspective on Knowledge Generation Saunaka Yaska Panini (Linguistics) Baudhayana Caraka Kanada Gautama Buddha Mahavira Kapila Aryabhatta Dignaga Prasastapada (Ontology) Virasena (Human Action) Bhoja Udayana Bhaskaracharya Abhinavagupta (Aesthetics) Gangesa (Logic) Jyesthdeva Nilakantha© CanopusConsulting
  25. 25. Age of Turbulence© CanopusConsulting
  26. 26. © CanopusConsulting
  27. 27. Blog:© CanopusConsulting