next up previous
Next: Transcending Contexts Up: Deriving Properties of the Previous: Second Question: Qualitative Case

Third Question: Dealing with Ambiguity

    We are assuming that the predicate tex2html_wrap_inline4342 is ambiguous in the discourse contexts since it can be ambiguously interpreted as either the predicate tex2html_wrap_inline4729 or as the predicate tex2html_wrap_inline4731 in some knowledge base. In the third question the predicate is disambiguated for context c6. This will allow us to prove that the GE bid on the FX22 engine is $4M including spare parts. Note that we will have to state the above in the kb context because the discourse contexts are not expressive enough to distinguish between the price including spares and the price excluding spares (which in fact was the source of ambiguity).

Theorem (kb): ist(c_kb tex2html_wrap_inline4735 ,price-including-spares(engine(22),$4M))

Proof !kb(kb): By reasoning similar to the first question, we can conclude


From the frame axioms we get


similarly to the frame derivation in the second question. Now the theorem follows from the above formulas. tex2html_wrap_inline4739

See [10] for more details.

Sasa Buvac
Sun Jul 12 14:45:30 PDT 1998