Over the past fifty years, the fabric of our society has been radically transformed by successful logic-based applications. In today\u2019s world, logic chips (i.e., CPUs) and the logic-grounded software that controls them support nearly all socio-economic infrastructure, from banking to defense. These global computing applications are the major arena where logic as a body of knowledge meets, and is tested against reality. \u00a0Although classical first- order logic\u00a0 (FOL)\u00a0 appears to work perfectly for truth functional applications such as computer chip design where propositions are guaranteed to have a truth value (i.e., a positive XOR negative charge),\u00a0 inference problems characteristic of widely used logic-grounded software technologies [Thomsen 2002], and representation problems characteristic of logic-based research into natural language understanding (Berant, Chou, Frostig et al., 2013) suggest that there are foundational areas in logic that are not yet completely understood.<\/p>\n
Following is a rough \u00a0introduction to my R&D activities\u00a0in pure and applied logic. \u00a0It has a decidedly Wittgensteinian bent.<\/p>\n
Research into Type-Logical semantics and its application to real world problems of inference and knowledge management<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n In the\u00a0\u00a0paper \u00a0Improving Semantic Software with Tractarian Logic_Final<\/span><\/a><\/span>\u00a0, we\u00a0focus on the \u00a0problem of\u00a0translating information from a natural form (e.g., token sequences for natural languages, data bases or spreadsheets) into an explicitly logical form (e.g., First Order Logic FOL). \u00a0And we outline the real world problems that occur in these kind of semantic software applications owing to specific characteristics of the FOL upon which they are based.\u00a0 We then describe how Wittgenstein in the Tractatus and his lectures from the early 1930s advocates logical approaches relevant to semantic software that differ in significant ways from what became absorbed into consensus FOL.\u00a0 In particular, we argue that Wittgenstein\u2019s views on logic provide practical guidance for the mapping of sentences into putative propositions, for differentiating classically behaved propositions from other wff, and for the role of logic in natural language processing<\/p>\n In the paper \u00a0Triggering a Copernican Shift in Logic through Sequenced Evaluations<\/span> -final<\/a> \u00a0– which was a finalist in a paper competition on the future of logic, we evaluate the performance of classical first order logic across a variety of logic-consuming information technologies. \u00a0For those areas where classical logic fares worst, we identify specific changes to first order logic that would improve both logic as an abstract discipline against its own abstract criteria (i.e., paradox) and the performance of those information technologies that most depend on logic<\/p>\n 2013-2016: Development of\u00a0a smart information grid<\/a>\u00a0<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n Supported by US government R&D grants,\u00a0 built software that extracts semantics from various surface media and fuses it all into an extensible spatio-temporal event representation that supports logical and computational reasoning<\/span><\/p>\n 2012: Rough draft (core dump) for a new paradigm and a formal model for logic that attempts to extend classical first order logic (FOL)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n How the Great War impacted the roots of modern logic<\/a>\u00a0 \u00a0<\/span>An historical introduction to the unfinished research program of Bertrand Russell and Ludwig Wittgenstein and why it is relevant today<\/p>\n A Critique of the consensus paradigm in logic<\/a>\u00a0 \u00a0<\/span>An introduction to the consensus paradigm and a description of its most crippling flaws<\/p>\n A new paradigm for logic<\/a>\u00a0 \u00a0<\/span>Describes cognition and awareness through \u00a0multiple levels of embedded processes. Points the way to a new view of the mind-body distinction. And a new grounding for logic.<\/p>\n Knowing the World is Language<\/a>\u00a0 \u00a0<\/span>A draft proposed theory of logic based on a new paradigm of cognitive processing that also attempts to provide a foundation for language and mathematics<\/p>\n 2007-2011: start ups and consulting: prototyping specific type engine-based applications<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Research questions<\/em><\/span> Papers\/output<\/em><\/span> At a more applied level<\/em><\/span> 2003-2007: Working as chief scientist for a large corporation building type-logical engine pieces and applications for business<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Research questions<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n \u21d2\u00a0Computational models for organizational performance management<\/span> Papers\/output<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n \u2666\u00a0Organizational performance management: grounding papers<\/span> 1994-2003 Period of application and synthesis<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Research questions<\/em><\/span> Papers\/output<\/em><\/span> 1989-1994: First cut at an alternative foundation, first cut at mapping it to canonical beliefs\/approaches, first application to software<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n Research questions:<\/em><\/span> Papers\/output<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n \u2666\u00a0Kirkberg Austria 1993: Foundations of Logic<\/span><\/p>\n Peer-reviewed paper<\/span> \u2666\u00a0Kirkberg Austria 1992: Foundations of Mathematics<\/p>\n Peer-reviewed paper and publication \u2666\u00a0Kirkberg Austria 1989: Foundations of Language<\/p>\n Peer-reviewed paper and publication
\n \u21d2 How to extract the dimensional model implicit within a collection of spreadsheets<\/span>
\n \u21d2 How to generate image signatures without the use of pre-defined ontologies in a way that would make them comprehensible to humans<\/span>
\n \u21d2 How to extract testable propositions from text<\/span>
\n \u21d2 How to parse text into a logical form that immediately integrates with a knowledge store<\/span>
\n \u21d2 How to represent disparate information in a semantically unified fashion<\/span>
\n \u21d2 How to infer across quantitative and qualitative information in the presence of uncertainties, and inconsistencies<\/span><\/p>\n
\n\u2666 Overview to the LC Logical Typing System<\/a><\/span>
\n \u2666LC Foundations of Abstract Science<\/a><\/span>
\n \u2666Logical implication for propositional variables in LC Type Logic<\/a><\/span>
\n \u2666Logical implication for predicate variables in LC Type logic<\/a><\/span>
\n\u2666Patent filing (#20100169758)<\/span> Extracting Semantics from Data<\/a><\/span>
\n \u2666A critique of the consensus paradigm in logic<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n
\nRegarding spreadsheet interpretation<\/a><\/span>
\n Regarding image interpretation<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n
\n \u21d2 Abstract definitional layers that support federated heterogeneous query processing<\/span>
\n \u21d2 Next gen Type Engines<\/span><\/p>\n
\n \u2666\u00a0Enterprise risk management<\/span>
\n\u2666 Patent (#7,797,320)<\/span> on a method for computing semi-orthogonal partial bases in N dimensional categorical data sets<\/span><\/a>
\n\u2666 Patent (#7,631,005)<\/span> on a method for defining nested irregular views<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n
\n \u21d2 What are the core theoretical problems with canonical logic?<\/span>
\n \u21d2 What are the core theoretical problems with canonical mathematics<\/span>
\n \u21d2 How do the foundations of math and logic relate to software?<\/span>
\n \u21d2 First cut of a foundation for abstract science<\/span>
\n \u21d2 What are the key functional characteristics of Type Engines as compared with current Relational or Multidimensional database architectures<\/span><\/p>\n
\n\u2666 Relating LC to the Canonical foundations of Mathematics<\/a><\/span>
\n \u2666 Relating LC to Canonical Logic<\/a><\/span>
\n \u2666 Overview of the relation between LC and Canonical Logic<\/a><\/span>
\n\u2666 OLAP Solutions: \u00a0Building Multidimensional Information systems 2nd edition<\/a><\/span>
\n \u2666 Microsoft OLAP Solutions<\/a><\/span>
\n \u2666 OLAP Solutions 1st edition<\/a><\/span>
\n \u2666 Synthesizing knowledge from large data sets<\/span><\/p>\n
\n \u21d2 What is the core process of meaning creation?<\/span>
\n \u21d2 What foundational problems (aka paradoxes) does this process\/approach resolve?<\/span>
\n \u21d2 What practical problems can be solved by software that follows this approach?<\/span>
\n\u21d2What are the criteria for meaningfulness as relates to any kind of expression?<\/span>
\n\u21d2What is the smallest number of most irreducible dimensions that can be used to relate any expression with any expression?<\/span>
\n \u21d2How do these criteria for meaningfulness map to those of LW in the Tractatus?<\/span><\/p>\n
\n“Subsuming multi valued logics in a two tiered bi-valent approach”
\npresented at the Wittgenstein Symposium on the Foundations of Logic
\nAustria 1993;<\/p>\n
\n“A Functional Basis for Tractarian Number Theory”
\npresented at the Wittgenstein Symposium on the Foundations of Mathematics
\nAustria 1992; published in Wittgenstein’s Philosophy of Mathematics
\nVerlag Holder-Pichler-Tempsky Wien 1993<\/p>\n
\n“A Tractarian Approach to Information Modeling”
\npresented at the Wittgenstein Symposium on the Foundations of Language
\nAustria 1989; published in Wittgenstein-Towards a Re-evaluation
\nVerlag Holder-Pichler-Tempsky Wien 1990<\/p>\n