Search Mailing List Archives
[protege-discussion] evalyation of ontology
alex.shkotin at gmail.com
Wed Sep 1 22:02:45 PDT 2010
it is like -
you: my ontology is consistent.
he: show me your proof.
you: I did not prove it. DL-reasoner has told me.
he: but what about your own proof?
2010/9/1 Timothy Redmond <tredmond at stanford.edu>
> On 09/01/2010 01:08 AM, Tale Lawrence wrote:
> Thanks so much. I have used the reasoner and there was no inconsistency.
> but you in the academics they still want some other things like mathematical
> proofs for the research to be accepted. this is the problem I am having.
> Mathematical proofs of what? I think that such an evaluation of the
> ontology would somehow depend on an analysis of what the ontology is
> intended to do.
> protege-discussion mailing list
> protege-discussion at lists.stanford.edu
> Instructions for unsubscribing:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the protege-discussion