Skip to main content
Log in

Computational mereology: A study of part-of relations for multimedia indexing

  • Published:
Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

How to index or retrieve multimedia objects is by no means obvious, because the computer can retrieve right multimedia material only if it reasons about its contents. We show that it is possible to write formal specifications of this reasoning process using set theory and mereology. We discuss the theoretical consequences of trying to use mereology and set theory for multimedia indexing and retrieval. We re-examine the roles of mereology and set theory in knowledge representation. We conclude that both commonsense set theories and mereologies should play the role of constraining databases of arbitrary multimedia objects, e.g. video clips. But although both should be viewed as database constraints, we argue that part-of hierarchies should be used to encode relatively permanent background knowledge, elsewhere names thereferential level, while member-of hierarchies should describe arbitrary multimedia records. We also propose a language and a set of axioms, SetNM, for natural mereologies with sets. A multimedia indexing system can then be viewed as a particular SetNM theory.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Encyclopedia Britannica (Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., Chicago, IL, 1984).

  2. Hospitals attack a crippler: Paper, Business Week (Feb. 21, 1994)104–106.

  3. P. Aczel, Non-well-founded sets, CSLI Lecture Notes No. 14 (Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford, CA, 1988).

    Google Scholar 

  4. J. Barwise,Admissible Sets and Structures (Springer, New York, 1975).

    Google Scholar 

  5. J. Barwise and J. Etchemendy,The Liar: An Essay on Truth and Circularity (Oxford University Press, New York, 1987).

    Google Scholar 

  6. J. Barwise and J. Perry,Situations and Attitudes (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1983).

    Google Scholar 

  7. J. Barwise (ed.),Handbook of Mathematical Logic (North-Holland, New York, 1977).

    Google Scholar 

  8. W. Clocksin and C. Mellish,Programming in Prolog (Springer, New York, 1981).

    Google Scholar 

  9. J. Corbeil,The Stoddart Visual Dictionary (Stoddart, Toronto, Canada, 1986).

    Google Scholar 

  10. K. Devlin,Logic and Information (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1991).

    Google Scholar 

  11. P. Halmos,Naive Set Theory (Van Nostrand, New York, 1960.

    Google Scholar 

  12. G. Hirst,Semantic Interpretation and the Resolution of Ambiguity (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1987).

    Google Scholar 

  13. J. Jaffar and M. Maher, Constraint logic programming: A survey, J. Logic Program. 10 (1994).

  14. T.J. Jech,Set Theory (Academic Press, New York, 1978).

    Google Scholar 

  15. M. Kim, Guardian: A home-care consulting system for children with leukemia, RC 19858, IBM, T.J. Watson Research Center, Yorktown Heights, New York (1994).

    Google Scholar 

  16. M. Pakkan and V. Akman, Issues in commonsense set theory, Department of Computing Engineering and Information Science, Bilkent University, Ankara, Turkey (1992).

    Google Scholar 

  17. C. Peirce,Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1984).

    Google Scholar 

  18. D. Perlis, Circumscribing with sets, Artificial Intelligence 31(1987)210–211.

    Google Scholar 

  19. D. Perlis, Commonsense set theory, in:Meta-Architecture and Reflection, eds. P. Maes and D. Nardi (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1987) pp. 87–98.

    Google Scholar 

  20. J. Shoenfield,Mathematical Logic (Addison-Wesley, New York, 1967).

    Google Scholar 

  21. P. Simons,Parts: A Study in Ontology (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1987).

    Google Scholar 

  22. W. Zadrozny, Intended models, circumscription and commonsense reasoning,Proc. Int. Joint Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI-87, Milan, Italy (1987) pp. 909–916.

  23. W. Zadrozny, A theory of default reasoning,Proc. 6th National Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI-87, Seattle, Washington (1987) pp. 385–390.

  24. W. Zadrozny, Cardinalities and well orderings in a commonsense set theory, in:Proc. 1st Int. Conf. on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, eds. R.J. Brachman, H.J. Levesque and R. Reiter (Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 1989) pp. 486–497.

    Google Scholar 

  25. W. Zadrozny, On compositional semantics,Proc. Coling'92. Nantes, France (1992) pp. 260–266.

  26. W. Zadrozny, Reasoning with background knowledge — a three-level theory, Comp. Intell. 10(1994)150–184.

    Google Scholar 

  27. W. Zadrozny and K. Jensen, Semantics of paragraphs, Comp. Linguist. 17(1991)171–210.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zadrozny, W., Kim, M. Computational mereology: A study of part-of relations for multimedia indexing. Ann Math Artif Intell 15, 83–100 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01535842

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01535842

Keywords

Navigation