CLOSED LOOP INTERVAL ONTOLOGY
       The Digital Integration of Conceptual Form
TzimTzum/Kaballah | Loop definition | Home | ORIGIN    
Please sign in
or register

Email *

Password *

Home | About

Select display
Show public menu
Show all theme groups
Show all themes
Show all terms
Order results by
Alphabetical
Most recently edited
Progress level
Placeholder
Note
Sketch
Draft
Polished


Searches selected display

The Many Forms of Many/One
Universal conceptual form

Invocation
Aligning the vision

Project under development
Evolving and coalescing

Guiding motivation
Why we do this

A comprehensive vision
Ethics / governance / science

Cybernetic democracy
Homeostatic governance

Collective discernment
Idealized democracy

Objectives and strategy
Reconciliation and integration

Reconciliation of perspectives
Holistic view on alternatives

What is a concept?
Definitions and alternatives

Theories of concepts
Compare alternatives

What is truth?
How do we know?

Semantics
How meaning is created

Synthetic dimensionality
Foundational recursive definition

Universal hierarchy
Spectrum of levels

A universal foundation
The closed loop ensemble contains
all primary definitions

Set
Dimensions of set theory

Numbers
What is a number?

Venn diagrams
Topology of sets

Objects in Boolean algebra
How are they constructed?

Core vocabulary
Primary terms

Core terms on the strip
Closed Loop framework

Graphics
Hierarchical models

Digital geometry
Euclid in digital space

The dimensional construction
of abstract objects
Foundational method

The digital integration
of conceptual form
Compositional semantics

Closed loop interval ontology
How it works

Cognitive science
The integrated science of mind

Equality
What does it mean?

Formal systematic definitions
Core terms

Data structures
Constructive elements
and building blocks

Compactification
Preserving data under transformation

Steady-state cosmology
In the beginning

Semantic ontology
Domain and universal

Foundational ontology
A design proposal

Coordinate systems
Mapping the grid

Articles
From other sources

Arithmetic
Foundational computation

Plato's republic and
homeostatic democracy
Perfecting political balance

Branching computational architecture
Simultaneity or sequence

Abstract math and HTML
Concrete symbolic representation

All knowledge as conceptual
Science, philosophy and math
are defined in concepts

Does the Closed Loop
have an origin?
Emerging from a point


Theme
Uses of foundational ontology
Placeholder

Definition / description

Foundational ontology is about categories of reality or thought which are common to all or almost all subject-matters. Commonly considered examples of such categories include ‘object’, ‘quality’, ‘function’, ‘role’, ‘process’, ‘event’, ‘time’, and ‘place’. There are several foundational ontologies that provide a systematic formal representation of these categories, their relationships, and interdependencies. Amongst existing foundational ontologies, there is both a substantial measure of agreement and some dramatic disagreements. There is currently no uniform consensus concerning how a foundational ontology should be organised, how far its ‘reach’ should be (e.g., is the distinction between physical and non-physical entities sufficiently fundamental to be included here?), and even what role it should play in relation to more specialised domain ontologies.

The main use of foundational ontologies is as a starting point for the development of domain ontologies and application ontologies. A foundational ontology provides an ontology engineer with a conceptual framework that enables her to analyse a given domain, identify the entities in the domain as specialisations of the generic categories in the foundational ontology, and often reuse relationships (e.g., parthood) from the foundational ontology. The utilisation of foundational ontologies for the development of domain and application ontologies has two main benefits.

Firstly, the ontology engineer can reuse an existing set of well-studied ontological distinctions and design principles instead of having to develop an ad-hoc solution. Secondly, if two domain ontologies are based on the same foundational ontology, it is easier to integrate them.

http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2708/preface.pdf

Hide Placeholder Note Sketch Draft Polished

Fri, Apr 23, 2021