Jonathan Simon’s research while affiliated with New York University and other places

Le présent article est une tentative nouvelle d’articuler le rôle d’une théorie des vérifacteurs. Nous soutenons que la théorie de la vérifaction constitue une pierre angulaire dans une bonne méthodologie en métaphysique, mais que l’amalgame entre la théorie de la vérifaction et la théorie de la vérité a été responsable de certains excès associés aux approches vérifactionnistes dans la littérature récente. Nous montrons que la théorie de la vérifaction conserve son attrait comme instrument d’investigation métaphysique, et ce, malgré notre accord avec les doctrines déflationnistes telles que celles défendues par Ayer, Quine, Field et Horwich (ou, du moins, malgré notre neutralité à leur égard). Nous soutenons en outre que les intuitions sous-jacentes à la théorie de la vérifaction s’éclairent quand nous les dissocions d’une théorie de la vérité et, par-dessus tout, de la tentative de fournir une définition de la vérité.

The central hypothesis underlying this communication is that the methodology and conceptual rigor of a philosophically inspired formal ontology can bring significant benefits in the development and maintenance of application ontologies [A. Flett, M. Dos Santos, W. Ceusters, Some Ontology Engineering Procedures and their Supporting Technologies, EKAW2002, 2003]. This hypothesis has been tested in the collaboration between Language and Computing (L&C), a company specializing in software for supporting natural language processing especially in the medical field, and the Institute for Formal Ontology and Medical Information Science (IFOMIS), an academic research institution concerned with the theoretical foundations of ontology. In the course of this collaboration L&C's ontology, LinKBase, which is designed to integrate and support reasoning across a plurality of external databases, has been subjected to a thorough auditing on the basis of the principles underlying IFOMIS's Basic Formal Ontology (BFO) [B. Smith, Basic Formal Ontology, 2002. http://ontology.buffalo.edu/bfo]. The goal is to transform a large terminology-based ontology into one with the ability to support reasoning applications. Our general procedure has been the implementation of a meta-ontological definition space in which the definitions of all the concepts and relations in LinKBase are standardized in the framework of first-order logic. In this paper we describe how this principles-based standardization has led to a greater degree of internal coherence of the LinKBase structure, and how it has facilitated the construction of mappings between external databases using LinKBase as translation hub. We argue that the collaboration here described represents a new phase in the quest to solve the so-called "Tower of Babel" problem of ontology integration [F. Montayne, J. Flanagan, Formal Ontology: The Foundation for Natural Language Processing, 2003. http://www.landcglobal.com/].

The collaboration of Language and Computing nv (L&C) and the Institute for Formal Ontology and Medical Information Science (IFOMIS) is guided by the hypothesis that quality constraints on ontologies for software application purposes closely parallel the constraints salient to the design of sound philosophical theories. The extent of this parallel has been poorly appreciated in the informatics community, and it turns out that importing the benefits of philosophical insight and methodology into application domains yields a variety of improvements. L&C's LinKBase is one of the world's largest medical domain ontologies. Its current primary use pertains to natural language processing applications, but it also supports intelligent navigation through a range of structured medical and bioinformatics information resources, such as SNOMED-CT, Swiss-Prot, and the Gene Ontology (GO). In this report we discuss how and why philosophical methods improve both the internal coherence of LinKBase, and its capacity to serve as a translation hub, improving the interoperability of the ontologies through which it navigates.

Software application ontologies have the potential to become the keystone in state-of-the-art information management techniques. It is expected that these ontologies will support the sort of reasoning power required to navigate large and complex terminologies correctly and efficiently. Yet, there is one problem in particular that continues to stand in our way. As these terminological structures increase in size and complexity, and the drive to integrate them inevitably swells, it is clear that the level of consistency required for such navigation will become correspondingly difficult to maintain. While descriptive semantic representations are certainly a necessary component to any adequate ontology-based system, so long as ontology engineers rely solely on semantic information, without a sound ontological theory informing their modeling decisions, this goal will surely remain out of reach. In this paper we describe how Language and Computing nv (L&C), along with The Institute for Formal Ontology and Medical Information Sciences (IFOMIS), are working towards developing and implementing just such a theory, combining the open software architecture of L&C's LinkSuite TM with the philosophical rigor of IFOMIS's Basic Formal Ontology. In this way we aim to move beyond the more or less simple controlled vocabularies that have dominated the industry to date.

this paper we describe how this standardization has already led to an improvement in the LinKBase structure that allows for a greater degree of internal coherence than ever before possible. We then show the use of this philosophical standardization for the purpose of mapping external databases to one another, using LinKBase as translation hub, with a greater degree of success than possible hitherto. We demonstrate how this offers a genuine advance over other application ontologies that have not submitted themselves to the demands of philosophical scrutiny

Software application ontologies have the potential to become the keystone in state-of-the-art information management techniques. It is expected that these ontologies will support the sort of reasoning power required to navigate large and complex terminologies correctly and efficiently. Yet, there is one problem in particular that continues to stand in our way. As these terminological structures increase in size and complexity, and the drive to integrate them inevitably swells, it is clear that the level of consistency required for such navigation will become correspondingly difficult to maintain. While descriptive semantic representations are certainly a necessary component to any adequate ontology-based system, so long as ontology engineers rely solely on semantic information, without a sound ontological theory informing their modeling decisions, this goal will surely remain out of reach. In this paper we describe how Language and Computing nv (L&C), along with The Institute for Formal Ontology and Medical Information Sciences (IFOMIS), are working towards developing and implementing just such a theory, combining the open software architecture of L&C's LinkSuiteTM with the philosophical rigor of IFOMIS's Basic Formal Ontology. In this way we aim to move beyond the more or less simple controlled vocabularies that have dominated the industry to date.

To be presented at EuroMISE 2004, Prague, April 12-15 The central hypothesis of the collaboration between Language and Computing (L&C) and the Institute for Formal Ontology and Medical Information Science (IFOMIS) is that the methodology and conceptual rigor of a philosophically inspired formal ontology greatly benefits application ontologies.(1) To this end LinKBase®, L&C's ontology, which is designed to integrate and reason across various external databases simultaneously, has been submitted to the conceptual demands of IFOMIS's Basic Formal Ontology (BFO).(2) With this project we aim to move beyond the level of controlled vocabularies to yield an ontology with the ability to support reasoning applications. Our general procedure has been the implementation of a meta-ontological definition space in which the definitions of all the concepts and relations in LinKBase® are standardized in a framework of first-order logic. In this paper we describe how this standardization has already led to an improvement in the LinKBase® structure that allows for a greater degree of internal coherence than ever before possible. We then show the use of this philosophical standardization for the purpose of mapping external databases to one another, using LinKBase® as translation hub, with a greater degree of success than possible hitherto. We demonstrate how this offers a genuine advance over other application ontologies that have not submitted themselves to the demands of philosophical scrutiny. LinKBase® is one of the world's largest applications-oriented medical domain ontologies, and BFO is one of the world's first philosophically driven reference ontologies. The collaboration of the two thus initiates a new phase in the quest to solve the so-called "Tower of Babel" problem of ontology integration, and this paper reports its initial results.(3)

The central hypothesis of the collaboration of L&C and IFOMIS is that the methodology of formal ontology will benefit application ontologies such as L&C's Linkbase. In this paper we discuss one of the general procedures to be implemented, with examples of several areas in which it has already brought greater clarification and perspicuity (clarification of ambiguity, allowing better future algorithm design, i.e. less human operator reliance, as well as a framework for a future translation hub) to the Linkbase ontology. The general procedure has been the implementation of a meta-ontological definition space, in which definitions of all concepts and relations of Linkbase are standardized in a framework of first-order logic. We then describe how this standardization effort has led to improvement of Linkbase's treatment of parthood relations, relation between processes and objects, treatment of absence, and of functions. Our description also points to ways in which application ontologies in general are forced to grapple with genuinely philosophical issues.