The Computer Program as a Functional Whole

Sharing, downloading, and reusing software is common-place, some of which is carried out legally with open source software. When it is not legal, it is unclear how many infringements have taken place: does an infringement count for the artefact as a whole or for each source file of a computer program? To answer this question, it must first be established whether a computer program should be considered as an integral whole, a collection, or a mere set of distinct files, and why. We argue that a program is a functional whole, availing of, and combining, arguments from mereology, granularity, modularity, unity, and function to substantiate the claim. The argumentation and answer contributes to the ontology of software artefacts, may assist industry in litigation cases, and demonstrates that the notion of unifying relation is operationalisable.

A Mereology for Connected Structures

Classical mereology is based on the assumption that any two underlapping elements have a sum, yet there are many domains (such as manufacturing assemblies, molecular structure, gene sequences, and convex time intervals) in which this assumption is not valid. In such domains, mereological sums must be connected objects. However, there has been little work in providing an axiomatization of such a mereology. Based on the observation that the underlying structures in these domains are represented by graphs, we propose a new mereotopology that axiomatizes the connected induced subgraph containment ordering for a graph, and then identify an axiomatization of the mereology that is a module of the mereotopology.

Ontological Analysis and Modularization of CIDOC-CRM

The CIDOC-CRM ontology is a standard for cultural heritage data modeling. Despite its large exploitation, the ontology is primarily maintained in a semi-formal notation, which makes it difficult to homogeneously exploit it in digital environments. In addition, the ontology consists of several classes and relations, whereas one sometimes wishes to reuse it but only partially. The purpose of the paper is to contribute to the use of CIDOC by strengthening its foundations. On the basis of formal ontology theories, we propose a first analysis of the ontology to enhance its conceptual structure. We also present a preliminary modularization of CIDOC aimed at enhancing both its formalization and usage.

An Analysis of Commitments in Ontology Language Design

Multiple ontology languages have been developed over the years, which brings afore two key components: how to select the appropriate language for the task at hand and language design itself. This engineering step entails examining the ontological ‘commitments’ embedded into the language, which, in turn, demands for an insight into what the effects of philosophical viewpoints may be on the design of a representation language. But what are the sort of commitments one should be able to choose from that have an underlying philosophical point of view, and which philosophical stances have a knock-on effect on the specification or selection of an ontology language? In this paper, we provide a first step towards answering these questions. We identify and analyse ontological commitments embedded in logics, or that could be, and show that they have been taken in well-known ontology languages. This contributes to reflecting on the language as enabler or inhibitor to formally characterising an ontology or an ontological investigation, as well as the design of new ontology languages following the proposed design process.

Legal Theories and Judicial Decision-Making: An Ontological Analysis

In this paper, we expose the legal theories underlying two important classes of Legal Core Ontologies and show how these ontologies inherit both limitations and benefits (such as explanatory power) of their underlying theories. We do that with the help of a real case study in which we have normative omission and collision of principles. We use this case study to conduct an ontological analysis of the support for judicial decision-making in LKIF-Core (representing Kelsen’s Pure Theory of the Law) and UFO-L (representing Robert Alexy’s Theory of Constitutional Rights). We show that UFO-L is able to articulate the semantics of the content of judicial decisions by making explicit the individual’s legal positions that are raised in argumentation along a legal process. The same cannot be said of LKIF-Core that is based on the Kelsenian stance and focuses on the representation of general norms (norm types) and subsumption of facts to these norms.

Foundations for Ontology of Persistence: Beyond Talk of Temporal Parts

Persistence is about how things behave across time. It is generally discussed in terms of endurantism (three-dimensionalism) and perdurantism (four-dimensionalism). Despite the relevance of persistence to ontological modeling, however, there is no clear consensus over how to characterize precisely those two theories of persistence. This paper takes the initial steps towards a foundation for ontology of persistence. In particular, I examine by employing recent findings from philosophy of persistence how some major upper ontologies conceptualize endurantism and perdurantism. My resulting modest suggestion is that formal-ontological discussion on persistence should be updated by expanding its perspective beyond the topic of whether objects have proper temporal parts or not.

Foundations for an Ontology of Belief, Desire and Intention

Belief, desire, and intention are central notions in mentality and agency. We provide conceptual and formal foundations for an ontology of those mental entities. In this framework, beliefs and desires have a dual face: dispositional and occurrent. As distinct from beliefs and desires, intentions are dispositions to actions that emerge from a decision process in which occurrent beliefs and occurrent desires interact. We also discuss how our theory can be extended to some major philosophical accounts of desires, and cognitive biases such as wishful thinking.

Towards GFO 2.0: Architecture, Modules and Applications

The General Formal Ontology (GFO) is a top-level ontology that has been developed by the Onto-Med Research Group since the early 2000s. Since that time several new theoretical results have been achieved as well as numerous projects have utilized the ontology, especially in complex domains such as bioinformatics and medical computer science. This leads to the need for an up-to-date overview of GFO and access to its applications. This paper represents the first step towards introducing the GFO 2.0 framework, which aims at the integration of the work that is already present, but scattered in various publications, and its provision as a ready-to-use and reusable framework. For this purpose we summarize key features of GFO so far, outline a novel modular architecture and survey first modules for GFO 2.0, linking to applications. Finally, a rigorous and systematic development process is indicated.

Pluralities, Collectives, and Composites

Forests, cars and orchestras are very different ontological entities, and yet very similar in some aspects. The relationships they have with the elements they are composed of is often assumed to be reducible to standard ontological relations, like parthood and constitution, but how this could be done is still debated. This paper sheds light on the issue starting from a linguistic and philosophical analysis aimed at understanding notions like plurality, collective and composite, and proposing a formal approach to characterise them. We conclude the presentation with a discussion and analysis of social groups within this framework.

An Analysis of the Debate over Structural Universals

The paper outlines a conceptual framework to identify all ontological and logical aspects relevant for the debate over structural universals. The framework allows for a multi-facetted classifications of various accounts of the latter and facilitates their comparison in a systematic way. To show the framework in action I use it to classify all major theoretical positions in this debate.