Well, I cannot say I haven’t done any progress. Working with OWL DL ontologies is a little bit hard if you want to model some physics concepts. What is the matter? OWL DL lacks of expressivity in order to make inferences or (as expected) calculations. The big trouble is that if you want to assert that “In a closed system the total energy is conserved”, but a simple literal expression. If you want to say that in a closed system , things get worse, because there is no way to operate and make inferences about this arithmetical operation. To give one more example: the mathematical condition on conservative fields is that its rotational be zero. That is to say in mathematical terms: . Some troubles appear: (1) is not possible to query about vector functions in order to know is its rotational is zero; (2) there is no way to say this using OWL DL formalism. There is no straight way to insert mathematical notations in OWL DL, using known ontology editors (Protégé, TopBraid…)

However, there is another possibility. OmDoc and OpenMath. There is a great deal of work about mathematical notation and querying about mathematical formulas. This is worth to study…

Advertisements

Like this:

LikeLoading...

Related

This entry was posted on Wednesday, March 31st, 2010 at 1:38 pm and is filed under Semantic Web testing. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

RT @rogeriotomazjr: Um vendedor de picolé tem mercadoria apreendida por vender em local proibido. Um helicóptero de senador é flagrado com… 16 hours ago