91,190 research outputs found
An Introduction to Ontology
Analytical philosophy of the last one hundred years has been heavily influenced by a doctrine to the effect that one can arrive at a correct ontology by paying attention to certain superficial (syntactic) features of first-order predicate logic as conceived by Frege and Russell. More specifically, it is a doctrine to the effect that the key to the ontological structure of reality is captured syntactically in the ‘Fa’ (or, in more sophisticated versions, in the ‘Rab’) of first-order logic, where ‘F’ stands for what is general in reality and ‘a’ for what is individual. Hence “f(a)ntology”. Because predicate logic has exactly two syntactically different kinds of referring expressions—‘F’, ‘G’, ‘R’, etc., and ‘a’, ‘b’, ‘c’, etc.—so reality must consist of exactly two correspondingly different kinds of entity: the general (properties, concepts) and the particular (things, objects), the relation between these two kinds of entity being revealed in the predicate-argument structure of atomic formulas in first-order logic
A geometry of information, I: Nerves, posets and differential forms
The main theme of this workshop (Dagstuhl seminar 04351) is `Spatial
Representation: Continuous vs. Discrete'. Spatial representation has two
contrasting but interacting aspects (i) representation of spaces' and (ii)
representation by spaces. In this paper, we will examine two aspects that are
common to both interpretations of the theme, namely nerve constructions and
refinement. Representations change, data changes, spaces change. We will
examine the possibility of a `differential geometry' of spatial representations
of both types, and in the sequel give an algebra of differential forms that has
the potential to handle the dynamical aspect of such a geometry. We will
discuss briefly a conjectured class of spaces, generalising the Cantor set
which would seem ideal as a test-bed for the set of tools we are developing.Comment: 28 pages. A version of this paper appears also on the Dagstuhl
seminar portal http://drops.dagstuhl.de/portals/04351
Shingle 2.0: generalising self-consistent and automated domain discretisation for multi-scale geophysical models
The approaches taken to describe and develop spatial discretisations of the
domains required for geophysical simulation models are commonly ad hoc, model
or application specific and under-documented. This is particularly acute for
simulation models that are flexible in their use of multi-scale, anisotropic,
fully unstructured meshes where a relatively large number of heterogeneous
parameters are required to constrain their full description. As a consequence,
it can be difficult to reproduce simulations, ensure a provenance in model data
handling and initialisation, and a challenge to conduct model intercomparisons
rigorously. This paper takes a novel approach to spatial discretisation,
considering it much like a numerical simulation model problem of its own. It
introduces a generalised, extensible, self-documenting approach to carefully
describe, and necessarily fully, the constraints over the heterogeneous
parameter space that determine how a domain is spatially discretised. This
additionally provides a method to accurately record these constraints, using
high-level natural language based abstractions, that enables full accounts of
provenance, sharing and distribution. Together with this description, a
generalised consistent approach to unstructured mesh generation for geophysical
models is developed, that is automated, robust and repeatable, quick-to-draft,
rigorously verified and consistent to the source data throughout. This
interprets the description above to execute a self-consistent spatial
discretisation process, which is automatically validated to expected discrete
characteristics and metrics.Comment: 18 pages, 10 figures, 1 table. Submitted for publication and under
revie
On Formal Methods for Collective Adaptive System Engineering. {Scalable Approximated, Spatial} Analysis Techniques. Extended Abstract
In this extended abstract a view on the role of Formal Methods in System
Engineering is briefly presented. Then two examples of useful analysis
techniques based on solid mathematical theories are discussed as well as the
software tools which have been built for supporting such techniques. The first
technique is Scalable Approximated Population DTMC Model-checking. The second
one is Spatial Model-checking for Closure Spaces. Both techniques have been
developed in the context of the EU funded project QUANTICOL.Comment: In Proceedings FORECAST 2016, arXiv:1607.0200
Topological Foundations of Cognitive Science
A collection of papers presented at the First International Summer Institute in Cognitive Science, University at Buffalo, July 1994, including the following papers:
** Topological Foundations of Cognitive Science, Barry Smith
** The Bounds of Axiomatisation, Graham White
** Rethinking Boundaries, Wojciech Zelaniec
** Sheaf Mereology and Space Cognition, Jean Petitot
** A Mereotopological Definition of 'Point', Carola Eschenbach
** Discreteness, Finiteness, and the Structure of Topological Spaces, Christopher Habel
** Mass Reference and the Geometry of Solids, Almerindo E. Ojeda
** Defining a 'Doughnut' Made Difficult, N .M. Gotts
** A Theory of Spatial Regions with Indeterminate Boundaries, A.G. Cohn and N.M. Gotts
** Mereotopological Construction of Time from Events, Fabio Pianesi and Achille C. Varzi
** Computational Mereology: A Study of Part-of Relations for Multi-media Indexing, Wlodek Zadrozny and Michelle Ki
Answer Set Programming Modulo `Space-Time'
We present ASP Modulo `Space-Time', a declarative representational and
computational framework to perform commonsense reasoning about regions with
both spatial and temporal components. Supported are capabilities for mixed
qualitative-quantitative reasoning, consistency checking, and inferring
compositions of space-time relations; these capabilities combine and synergise
for applications in a range of AI application areas where the processing and
interpretation of spatio-temporal data is crucial. The framework and resulting
system is the only general KR-based method for declaratively reasoning about
the dynamics of `space-time' regions as first-class objects. We present an
empirical evaluation (with scalability and robustness results), and include
diverse application examples involving interpretation and control tasks
Emergent spacetime and empirical (in)coherence
Numerous approaches to a quantum theory of gravity posit fundamental
ontologies that exclude spacetime, either partially or wholly. This situation
raises deep questions about how such theories could relate to the empirical
realm, since arguably only entities localized in spacetime can ever be
observed. Are such entities even possible in a theory without fundamental
spacetime? How might they be derived, formally speaking? Moreover, since by
assumption the fundamental entities can't be smaller than the derived (since
relative size is a spatiotemporal notion) and so can't 'compose' them in any
ordinary sense, would a formal derivation actually show the physical reality of
localized entities? We address these questions via a survey of a range of
theories of quantum gravity, and generally sketch how they may be answered
positively.Comment: 18 pages, 1 figure, accepted for publication in Studies in History
and Philosophy of Modern Physic
- …