From collective intentionality to intentional collectives: An ontological perspective

Bottazzi, Emanuele; Catenacci, Carola; Gangemi, Aldo; Lehmann, Jos

doi:10.1016/j.cogsys.2005.11.009

Cited by 33 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One corresponds to the definition of the intermediate notions of collection and collective, a collective being considered as a special case of collection [13]. As we have seen, we adopt a different position in accepting the concept Collection as defined by these authors, but in founding on different basis the notion of collective, and further of organization.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…On the one hand, in the field of formal ontologies, we have resources such as the foundational ontology DOLCE [12] 1 widely opened to the analysis of social entities. We have also recent works in the fields of formal ontologies of collections and collectives [13,14], formal ontologies of actions [15] and formal ontologies of processes [16]. On the other hand, it emerges from recent work in Philosophy of action, particularly in the Philosophy of collective social action [17,18] and in the Philosophy of the Social Science [19], a conceptual coherent framework to analyze social collective actions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Core Ontology of Business Processes Based on DOLCE

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

New performance requirements to adapt to the changing environment and to maintain a competitive advantage have contributed since the 1980s to the emergence of new types of organizations focused on projects or processes. To facilitate the implementation of this process view of organizations, many theoreticians and practitioners have proposed analysis and modeling frameworks, ontologies being considered as a relevant tool to conduct a "semantic analysis" of business processes. Approaches in this area are, however, based on ad hoc, often implicit modeling principles and the proposed ontologies remain poor in terms of expressiveness. The objective of this paper is to analyze the ontological foundations of the business processes following a formal approach. We propose a core ontology of business processes specializing the DOLCE foundational ontology and supplementing Bottazzi and Ferrario's DOLCE-based formal ontology of organizations. This ontology comprises several modules to reflect both the "static" aspects of organizations and their behaviors, including intentional ones. In the article, we present the contents of the ontology, the formal ontolog-B Mohamed Turki ical tools reused for its design, and the various theories the ontology is committed to.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

A Core Ontology of Business Processes Based on DOLCE

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since this axiom is a second order one, our OWL-DL axiomatization makes use of an extension of DOLCE called theory of collections (Bottazzi et al 2006), which reifies qualified sets as non-physical endurants that are unified by a description. In this case, the so-called collection of (all) physical endurants is unified by any instance of structural dependence:…”

Section: Dependences Between Quality Changesmentioning

confidence: 99%

An ontology of physical causation as a basis for assessing causation in fact and attributing legal responsibility

Lehmann

Gangemi

2007

Artif Intell Law

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Computational machineries dedicated to the attribution of legal responsibility should be based on (or, make use of) a stack of definitions relating the notion of legal responsibility to a number of suitably chosen causal notions. This paper presents a general analysis of legal responsibility and of causation in fact based on Hart and Honore´'s work. Some physical aspects of causation in fact are then treated within the ''lite'' version of DOLCE foundational ontology written in OWL-DL, a standard description logic for the Semantic Web.

show abstract

“…Bottazzi et al [7] are concerned with "intentional collectives", where "intentional" (with a "t") is not to be confused with "intensional" (with an "s") as used above; nor is "intentional" to be confused with "intention" in the sense of what one intends to do, but is rather related to intentionality in the sense of "aboutness", as described by Searle [27]. In this paper, as distinct from [6] and [11], the term "collection" is used to denote an I-collective; for example, "a collection of books in a library remains the same entity even if some books are lost and others are acquired over time".…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although they do not explicitly consider collectives, similar considerations might be applicable. Consider an I-collective whose members are mandatory but not essential, such as a chess-set: 7 if the black queen goes missing, it must be replaced by the same or another one for the chess set to continue to exist. This is comparable to the dinner service mentioned by Rector et al During the period between the loss of the queen and its subsequent replacement, however, it is not appropriate to say that the chess-set has been destroyed ("disabled"); rather, it is "suspended".…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Extensional and intensional collectives and the de re/de dicto distinction

Galton

Wood

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Expressions designating collectives, such as "the committee" or "the ships in the port", may be interpreted de re or de dicto, depending on context, according as they pick out collectives defined by their members or collectives defined by some criterion for membership. We call these E(xtensional)-collectives and I(ntensional)-collectives respectively, and in this paper we explore in depth the relationship between these two categories. In particular, we identify important respects in which they differ, regarding the nature of the dependence of the collective on its members, the nature of the parthood relation in which the members stand to the whole, and, from an application perspective, the different methods used for identifying the two forms of collective from large spatio-temporal data-sets.

show abstract

From collective intentionality to intentional collectives: An ontological perspective

Cited by 33 publications

References 11 publications

A Core Ontology of Business Processes Based on DOLCE

A Core Ontology of Business Processes Based on DOLCE

An ontology of physical causation as a basis for assessing causation in fact and attributing legal responsibility

Extensional and intensional collectives and the de re/de dicto distinction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About