Re: Hayes' scrutiny of Top 40

Piek Vossen (
Fri, 8 May 1998 10:06:43 +0200

Piek is for a meeting in Paris as from Friday May 8 - Sunday May 10,
therefore he cannot reply to this email at this point.
Anja Vossen-Weisscher

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: Robert Spillers <>
Aan: Piek Vossen <>
CC: John F. Sowa <>; jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
<jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU>; <>;
Adam_Farquhar@KSL.Stanford.EDU <Adam_Farquhar@KSL.Stanford.EDU>; <>; <>; <>; feigenbaum@KSL.Stanford.EDU
<>; <>; <>; <>;
<>; <>; <>; <>;
onto-std@KSL.Stanford.EDU <onto-std@KSL.Stanford.EDU>; <>;
<>; <>; <>; <>;
<>; <>; <>
Datum: vrijdag 8 mei 1998 8:40
Onderwerp: Re: Hayes' scrutiny of Top 40

>I agree. The lexicon is an excellent idea.
>So... what features should it have? How will it interface with an
>What function(s) should be emphasized - information retrieval, machine
>translation, inferencing, etc? Can it be tuned to a specific purpose - by
>Piek Vossen wrote:
>> >I would put the issue Lee has raised on the list of topics to be
>> >addressed in Heidelberg. I think that we will have to draw some sort
>> >of distinction between the words used in a natural language and the
>> >categories used in one of our ontologies.
>> >
>> >I firmly believe that they are strongly related, but I also think
>> >that we should use a lexicon to provide the mappings between them.
>> I agree with this. It will be one of the key issues to be discussed. One
>> the things which makes wordnets so odd at the higher level, is that the
>> principle to relate word to their hyperonym no longer works above a
>> particular level (let's say above the cognitive basic level of
>> categorization (Rosch 1977)). Beyond that level you need something else
>> capture inferences and different types of hyperonyms to create a wordnet
>> that explains word-substitutions that can be used in Information
>> Language Generation, etc.
>> Piek.