2/28/2004 12:40 PM
The Story Line (11/24/2003 8:18 AM)
A few paragraphs from an unwritten story
“The BCNGroup founders had hoped to open up the discussion up, a bit, to some of the other leading knowledge science workers. But they have found this to be is a difficult proposition for several reasons.
Long-term affect of business oriented non-disclosure agreements inhibit the free expression of fundamental work on the knowledge technologies. The accepted ethic has become one that is against the very nature of science done as science within a community of learned individuals. (also see [*], [**], [***] etc..)
“Dr. Prueitt mused about this for a while. Several decades ago a business process re-engineering methodology was developed. This methodology, like so many others, was heralded with great fanfare but ultimately was largely discredited. The core concept behind the methodology seems absolutely correct and elegant. But something somehow was missing in how this core concept came to be applied in the real world.
“His thoughts shifted to the AS-IS model developed in 2002. For about 6 months he was Senior Scientist at a research and deployment subcontractor for Army Intelligence. During this time he interacted with Admiral Poindexture, and his business/science advisors, on how an open source project called J-39 might be given a better form of machine intelligence. The TO-BE framework was not right, he had realized some months later. But the AS-IS model does seem to be correct in every respect.
His experiences with Army Intelligence contractors were that contracts are written by individuals whose identity changes immediately after a Broad Area Announcement (BAA) is authored. The BAA then is made public with a 15-day open competition window. The affect of this institutional behavior is that the contractor’s needs are heavily reflected in the BAA. Aside from being technically illegal, this behavior can hijack the interests of the American people while providing a stable revenue stream to incumbent contractors who have the inside knowledge about what is being written as procurement instruments. If everyone was very honest and knowledgeable then there would be no problem, but this is not the case.
“Dr. Prueitt reflected on the two party system. The procurement AS-IS model is not about a Republican behavior, it reflects the behavior of the Democrats as well. But the Presidental race does seem to be revolving around just this issue. The issue asks whether the American People can trust the American Government when business processes have become a type of state sponsored religion.
“His repeated attempts to build an AS-IS model about the two party system fails, and he gives up on one more attempt to see how the overall system of procurement might evolve into one that is more open to critically needed innovation untouched by the large contractors.”
Our attempt is to examine the claims in several of the business processes related to the social need to establish the knowledge sciences as an academic discipline. Specifically there have been some recent conversations between the BCNGroup founders and Richard Ballard, founder of Knowledge Foundations Inc. The discussions have also involved, since 1991, our founders and a little under 80 scholars in various fields related to mathematical and formal modeling of natural systems.
Some scholars, like John Sowa, knows the Knowledge Foundations work well and have formed specific long-term views on his student's approach. Other scientists like the Peircean / Dewey scholar, Roger Clough, has never seen this work - but will have some specific and hard questions about the approach. Our generalization of part of the essence of Sowa’s interpretation of Peircean logic is given in generalFramework theory.
The Founders anticipated Clough's comments and the reactions by Ballard. Some systematic issues can be teased out.
The Founders reflect on a Bloom type (learning/thinking) taxonomy that focuses on analytics and synthesis. Clough's point of view is a hard one to integrate with machine representational work, but it focuses on the human aspects of knowledge sharing in communities. Both Ballard and Clough have a firm foundation in Charles Sanders Peirce's pragmatic philosophy.
The Founders find themselves in good thought, but thought that is very far away from the social discourse on government IT procurement practices. We conjecture that the social discourse is improvised by bureaucratic behavior and by the habituation of an abusive pattern that has characterized the relationship between science and business. 
Our society has a critical need of knowledge technology, properly expressed as science and as scholarly curriculum for schools and universities.  These beads game explore how the American people can make knowledge technology available for easy and open use.
The Founders return to the question of government IT procurements, the AS-IS model and the innovations that are lost to our society. We have conjectured that one cause of the loss is due to monopoly practices by established businesses and institutions. Another cause of the loss is due to the simple difficulties that most innovators have in understanding how to bring innovation into the public markets.
We will take the case of what is referred to as machine encoded formal ontology. The scholars discuss the issue in this bead thread.
Many of the primary innovators have defined how one can usefully encode taxonomy, and ontology, into machine accessable form. For example, the ontology referential base (Orbs) are endowed with encoding forms that makes the scalability issue simply go way. Ideally, one would want to combine the various patents with CoreSystem concepts related to data regularity in context.
The fact is demonstrable, that scalability issues also goes away if one was able to refine Tim Berners Lee’s notions about the Semantic Web concept with the fundamentals expressed in the CoreSystem concept. But the ownership issue remains. The BCNGroup is proposing that CoreSystem should become the eventual architecture for the Knowledge Sharing Core.
However, a much simpler and less expensive solution exists for a CoreSystem “light”, where principles of data regularity and contextual information is developed using a very simple data encoding mechanism.
A judgment about factual compressibility of knowledge representation has become a formal BCNGroup judgment, and has some cognitive neuroscience to ground this judgment. The consequent of our analysis is placed into the HIP paradigm. The demonstration is done with public domain technology created by OntologyStream Inc.
The key to such our demonstration is the treatment of invariance categorically, and the development of a measurement processes that produces organically derived controlled vocabularies that reflect the richness of knowledge sharing in communities of practice.
The Knowledge Sharing Foundation concept envisions commercial systems from companies like Stratify Inc, Entrieva Inc, and the CCM-Powered NdCore ™ conceptual role-up system from ATS to provide a broad set of tools. These tools are, however, are to be stripped of the commercial presentational layers, and made available within a
and for business and government.
One of the linguists at CIA’s In-Q-Tel organization recently suggested that the greatest need, in the CIA, was for knowledge management tools. In-Q-Tel’s web site confirms this interest.
The integrated tools require that knowledge representational issues are done so well that communities of practice can shift the instrument of communication from telephones and faxes to ontology mediating structures that have fractal encoding:
The result is an ignition of the two sides of the Semantic Web:
Significantly, both CoreSystem and Knowledge Foundations have a computer software implementation to "fractally" scale knowledge representations and both have an architecture that could satisfy the present needs in the Department of Homeland Security. But the satisfaction would only come if the systems where adopted globally, which means displacing billions of dollars in software. It also means that issues imposed by government bureaucrats can be managed by Federal law and court decisions.
The KSF concept allows a more organic evolution of adoption, and does this at a small fraction of the cost.
Fractal scalability means essentially that there is a discovery and reuse of the underlying pattern invariance in the structure of the "semantic web". This is what Dr. Prueitt calls categorical Abstraction (cA).
Dr. Prueitt expresses a small formal theory on frameworks, which he calls generalFramework (gF) theory. Any time that there is a set of semantic primitives and a taxonomy on those primitives, then we have a "periodic table" with the elements of that periodic table the same semantic primitives. The core issue is situational / universal primitives. A knowledge scientist, Jeff Long, has said much about this over the years in his work on "ultrastructure". Ultrastructure is used in many internal government knowledge representational systems, but was initially developed to be used in finding regularity in business processes.
The mystery is that cA based systems are infinitely simpler than artificial intelligence.
cA is based on the formation of abstract notational systems such as counting numbers.
Informational bits are “seen” as invariances in patterns of words, and then converted into an Ontology Referential Base (ORB).
The relationships that are derived (from human encoding/reification of informational bits and from some automous process that employ linguistic and ontology services) are reflected in Tim Berners Lee's notion of the machine side of the two-sided semantic web.
Interoperability between machines, as well as the fidelity and utility of the encoding structures, is a key to "igniting" the two sides to the semantic web.
Knowledge Foundation Inc’s vision of how things are published becomes more of an explicit asset to business, than to individuals. CoreSystem’s vision on instrumenting the detection of data regularity in context can also be seen as serving business directly and individuals indirectly.
We continue to suggest that the CoreSystem system and the Knowledge Foundations work (that is now partially revealed in Mark 2 and Mark 3 knowledge systems) should be part of a larger process that the BCNGroup has proposed. This proposal requires a National Project funded by the White House and the Congress, on behalf of the American People.
The core objective of the two-year start-up is knowledge sciences curriculum development.
The exact nature of the BCNGroup-proposed National Project is the topic of a discussion.
The product of that discussion will be a specific proposal to the White House and to the democratic candidate for the Presidency
 Footnote added in 2006 by Prueitt to current discussion URL:
 Footnote added in 2006 to the Knowledge Sharing Foundation work URL: