Talk:Abstract Wikipedia/Examples/Jupiter

"is a" as a classification signal in Sentence 1.3

I would have thought that rather than a description, or definition, that an occurrence of "is a" would be a pretty strong signal for Class or Type inference. I.E. that it would have a representation of object: gas giant (Q121750) ? And in doing so, we can sort of see how the AND rule could even be applied later via introspection with validity functions maybe even using ShEx etc. Example: if you are a planet and you are composed of gas, and you are large, then you are likely a "gas giant". --Thadguidry (talk) 19:29, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

That's a great point, and honestly, I don't know what the answer will be. "is a" can mean a lot of things. It can mean subsumption ("A horse is a mammal"), it can mean classification ("Jupiter is a planet"), it can mean a description ("Jupiter is gaseous"), it can mean a definition ("Jupiter is the largest planet in our system" - hmm, that's more a "is the" instead of an "is a", but see, there are languages that don't make a difference between "a" and "the"), it can be a role assignment ("Side C is an adjacent side"), it can be a subjective assessment ("The Mona Lisa is a masterpiece"), and it can be much more. And the differences between these are neither clear cut nor easy.

To reiterate, yeah, mine is just a suggestion, but it could be easily something else. I am actually curious to see how many constructors will be developed in Abstract Wikipedia that, in English, are just clauses using "is a", and how their differences will appear. Maybe we won't even need so many because the other languages don't make the difference either? That would be convenient (from an NLG perspective, it would be unfortunate from a KR perspective, but hey, I am siding with the NLG side in this question to get us started).

So, yes, you may easily be right. And to be honest, I don't think we'll know until we have created a few hundred articles and a few thousand sentences in a few dozen languages where we had to make that decision.

If we wanted to, we could start doing some Wizard of Oz style experiments to figure that out beforehand. I surely wouldn't be opposed to that, it could be fascinating! And will help with getting Abstract Wikipedia off the ground faster. --DVrandecic (WMF) (talk) 22:35, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

Sentence 4.3 The four largest moons of Jupiter are ...

The four largest moons of Jupiter are Io, Europa, Ganymede, and Callisto.

• Definition
  • subject: List (Io, Europa, Ganymede, Callisto)
  • definition: Superlative
    • determiner: 4
    • subject: moon
    • quality: large
    • location constraint: Jupiter

seems, for accordance with 1.1 and 4.5 it should be this way:

• Superlative
  • subject: List (Io, Europa, Ganymede, Callisto)
  • determiner: 4
  • quality: large
  • class: moon
  • location constraint: Jupiter

--QDinar (talk) 20:34, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Sure, that's OK too. Feel free to fix. The order of the keys doesn't matter. --DVrandecic (WMF) (talk) 00:45, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Sentence 2.2 This is more than twice the mass of all the other planets ...

The masses will (hopefully) not change a lot for the planets, but for other topics I think it might be useful to define this as a calculation that derives that it is "more than twice". That is, we should add all the masses together and compare it to the mass of Jupiter, probably take the floor of that, and then find the adverb that relates to that number. ♥Ainali ^talk_{contributions} 20:02, 3 August 2022 (UTC)