DIKWP Semantic Mathematics: Theoretical Mapping of All Natural Language Semantics and Resolution of Philosophical Challenges
Yucong Duan
International Standardization Committee of Networked DIKWP for Artificial Intelligence Evaluation(DIKWP-SC)
World Artificial Consciousness CIC(WAC)
World Conference on Artificial Consciousness(WCAC)
(Email: duanyucong@hotmail.com)
Prof. Yucong Duan proposed that "Theoretically the DIKWP Semantic Mathematics will evolutionarily cover or map to all semantics of natural language expressions while resolving the Wittgenstein's Language Game, Laozi's Ineffability of Essence or "giving subjective definitions for concepts", etc. Even the Wittgenstein‘s problem of axiomatics of semantics will not be required as a compliment. The what Laozi said that something essential cann't be expressed as Laozi's Ineffability of Essence will be ended".
Abstract
Prof. Yucong Duan's Data-Information-Knowledge-Wisdom-Purpose (DIKWP) Semantic Mathematics framework proposes that it can theoretically map all semantics of natural language expressions. By exclusively manipulating the fundamental semantics of Sameness, Difference, and Completeness, the framework aims to resolve longstanding philosophical issues such as the "language game" and subjective definitions of concepts. This approach suggests that even Wittgenstein's problem regarding the axiomatics of semantics does not require additional complements and challenges Laozi's assertion that something essential cannot be expressed. This document explores how DIKWP Semantic Mathematics addresses these philosophical challenges, potentially providing a universal formalism for expressing all natural language semantics. Tables are provided to facilitate understanding.
1. Introduction
Natural language is rich, nuanced, and often ambiguous, leading to challenges in formalizing semantics and achieving precise communication. Philosophers like Ludwig Wittgenstein and Laozi have highlighted inherent limitations and complexities in language:
Wittgenstein's Language Game: Emphasizes that the meaning of words is shaped by their usage in various forms of life, leading to subjective definitions and interpretations.
Laozi's Ineffability of Essence: Suggests that the most profound truths cannot be adequately expressed through language.
Prof. Yucong Duan's DIKWP Semantic Mathematics proposes a theoretical framework that could map all natural language semantics using the foundational semantics of Sameness, Difference, and Completeness. This approach aims to overcome the limitations identified by Wittgenstein and Laozi by providing a universal and objective formalism for semantics.
2. DIKWP Semantic Mathematics and Natural Language Semantics2.1. Fundamental Semantics
The DIKWP Semantic Mathematics framework operates exclusively with three fundamental semantics:
Sameness (Data): Recognition of shared attributes or identities between entities.
Difference (Information): Identification of distinctions or disparities between entities.
Completeness (Knowledge): Integration of all relevant attributes and relationships to form holistic concepts.
Table 1: Fundamental Semantics in DIKWP Semantic Mathematics
| Fundamental Semantic | Description | DIKWP Component |
|---|---|---|
| Sameness | Recognition of shared attributes or identities between entities | Data |
| Difference | Identification of distinctions or disparities between entities | Information |
| Completeness | Integration of all relevant attributes and relationships (holistic) | Knowledge |
By iteratively and explicitly manipulating these semantics, the framework builds complex semantic structures without introducing additional concepts or subjective definitions.
2.2. Mapping Natural Language Semantics
The framework suggests that any natural language expression can be decomposed and mapped using these three fundamental semantics:
Process of Mapping:
Decomposition: Breaking down complex expressions into basic semantic components.
Mapping: Associating these components with Sameness, Difference, or Completeness semantics.
Integration: Combining the mapped semantics to reconstruct the original meaning within the formal framework.
Example:
Consider the natural language sentence:
"The cat sat on the mat."
Table 2: Mapping Example of a Natural Language Sentence
| Semantic Component | Identified Elements | Associated Fundamental Semantic |
|---|---|---|
| Entities | "cat", "mat" | Sameness (recognizing entities as objects) |
| Attributes | "sat" (action), "on" (spatial relation) | Difference (distinguishing roles and relations) |
| Integration | "The cat sat on the mat." (complete meaning) | Completeness (integrating entities and relations) |
Through this process, the framework aims to capture the entire semantic content of natural language expressions.
3. Resolving the "Language Game" and Subjective Definitions3.1. Wittgenstein's Language Game
Wittgenstein proposed that language meaning arises from its use in various "language games," which are context-dependent and shaped by social interactions. This leads to subjective definitions and the challenge of achieving objective meaning.
Table 3: Challenges Posed by Wittgenstein's Language Game
| Challenge | Description |
|---|---|
| Context-Dependence | Meaning varies based on usage in different contexts |
| Subjective Definitions | Words gain meaning through individual or cultural interpretations |
| Ambiguity in Communication | Potential for misunderstandings due to varied interpretations |
3.2. DIKWP's Objective Formalism
By reducing semantics to the fundamental and universal concepts of Sameness, Difference, and Completeness, the DIKWP framework aims to eliminate subjectivity:
Table 4: How DIKWP Addresses Wittgenstein's Challenges
| Wittgenstein's Challenge | DIKWP's Solution |
|---|---|
| Context-Dependence | Universal Semantics: Fundamental semantics are context-independent and universal |
| Subjective Definitions | Explicit Definitions: Semantics are explicitly defined, reducing ambiguity |
| Ambiguity in Communication | Formal Mapping: Precise mapping of expressions ensures consistent interpretation |
Implication:
The framework suggests that by formalizing semantics in this way, it can resolve the issues raised by Wittgenstein's language games, providing a consistent and objective method for defining and interpreting language.
4. Addressing Wittgenstein's Problem of Axiomatics of Semantics4.1. The Axiomatics of Semantics
Wittgenstein was skeptical about the possibility of establishing a complete axiomatic system for language semantics due to the fluid and context-dependent nature of language.
Table 5: Wittgenstein's View on Axiomatics of Semantics
| Concern | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Incompleteness | Language cannot be fully captured by a set of axioms |
| Contextual Variability | Meanings change with different usages and contexts |
| Subjectivity | Individual interpretations hinder universal axiomatization |
4.2. DIKWP's Solution
The DIKWP Semantic Mathematics framework proposes that:
No Additional Axioms Needed: The three fundamental semantics suffice to construct all necessary semantic structures.
Iterative and Recursive Application: By repeatedly applying the fundamental semantics, complex meanings emerge without the need for new axioms.
Self-Contained System: The framework is self-sufficient, meaning that all semantics can be expressed within it without external complements.
Table 6: DIKWP's Approach to Axiomatics of Semantics
| Aspect | DIKWP's Approach |
|---|---|
| Sufficiency of Fundamentals | Three semantics cover all necessary semantic constructions |
| Handling Contextual Variability | Iterative application adjusts for context within the framework |
| Objectivity | Universal semantics reduce subjective interpretation |
Result:
This approach challenges Wittgenstein's assertion by providing a potential axiomatic system for semantics that is both complete and consistent, based solely on the foundational semantics.
5. Confronting Laozi's Assertion on Ineffability5.1. Laozi's View on the Limitations of Language
Laozi, in the Tao Te Ching, suggests that the most profound truths (the Tao) cannot be adequately expressed through words:
"The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao."
Table 7: Laozi's Perspective on Language
| Assertion | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Ineffability of Essence | Essential truths transcend linguistic expression |
| Limitations of Language | Language is insufficient to capture the profound or infinite |
| Emphasis on Experience | True understanding comes from experience, not words |
5.2. DIKWP's Counterargument
The DIKWP framework posits that:
Expressibility of Essence: By using the fundamental semantics, even the most abstract or profound concepts can be formally expressed.
Elimination of Subjectivity: Since the semantics are objective and universal, they can capture the essence without distortion.
Completeness Semantics: The integration of all relevant attributes and relationships allows for a holistic representation of concepts.
Table 8: DIKWP's Response to Laozi's Assertion
| Laozi's Assertion | DIKWP's Counterargument |
|---|---|
| Ineffability of Essence | Expressibility through Fundamentals: Essential truths can be mapped using Sameness, Difference, and Completeness |
| Limitations of Language | Universal Formalism: The framework overcomes limitations by providing a precise semantic mapping |
| Emphasis on Experience | Holistic Representation: Completeness semantics integrate all aspects, including experiential elements |
Implication:
The framework suggests that the limitations described by Laozi can be overcome, asserting that essential truths can indeed be expressed within this formal system.
6. Theoretical Implications and Potential Impact6.1. Universal Semantic Framework
If the DIKWP Semantic Mathematics framework can indeed map all natural language semantics, it would provide:
A Universal Language of Semantics: Enabling precise communication and understanding across different languages and contexts.
Foundations for Advanced AI: Allowing AI systems to fully comprehend and generate natural language with human-like understanding.
Table 9: Potential Impact of DIKWP Semantic Mathematics
| Potential Benefit | Description |
|---|---|
| Universal Semantic Mapping | Standardized representation of all natural language semantics |
| Enhanced AI Language Processing | Improved natural language understanding and generation in AI |
| Philosophical Resolutions | Addressing long-standing issues in language philosophy |
6.2. Philosophical Resolutions
Overcoming Language Limitations: Addressing the philosophical challenges posed by Wittgenstein and Laozi regarding language and meaning.
Objective Semantics: Establishing a foundation for objective semantics that transcends subjective interpretations and definitions.
7. Challenges and Considerations
While the DIKWP framework is theoretically promising, several challenges need to be considered:
Table 10: Challenges in Implementing DIKWP Semantic Mathematics
| Challenge | Description |
|---|---|
| Practical Implementation | Complexity in applying the theoretical framework in real-world systems |
| Scalability | Managing computational requirements for complex semantics |
| Validation | Necessity of empirical testing to confirm theoretical claims |
| Integration with Existing Systems | Aligning with current linguistic and AI methodologies |
| Handling Ambiguity | Addressing inherent ambiguities in natural language |
8. Conclusion
Prof. Yucong Duan's DIKWP Semantic Mathematics framework proposes a revolutionary approach to mapping all natural language semantics using the fundamental semantics of Sameness, Difference, and Completeness. By providing a universal and objective formalism, it aims to resolve longstanding philosophical issues related to language ambiguity, subjective definitions, and the limitations of expression.
Table 11: Summary of DIKWP's Contributions
| Contribution | Impact |
|---|---|
| Universal Semantic Framework | Potential to map all natural language semantics |
| Philosophical Problem Resolution | Addresses challenges posed by Wittgenstein and Laozi |
| Foundations for AI Advancement | Enables development of AI with deeper language understanding |
If successfully implemented and validated, this framework could have profound implications for linguistics, philosophy, and artificial intelligence, potentially enabling machines to understand and generate language with human-like depth and nuance.
References
Duan, Y. (2023). The Paradox of Mathematics in AI Semantics. Proposed by Prof. Yucong Duan:" As Prof. Yucong Duan proposed the Paradox of Mathematics as that current mathematics will reach the goal of supporting real AI development since it goes with the routine of based on abstraction of real semantics but want to reach the reality of semantics. ".
Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical Investigations. Blackwell Publishing.
Laozi. (circa 6th century BCE). Tao Te Ching. Various translations.
Russell, S., & Norvig, P. (2021). Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach (4th ed.). Pearson.
Sowa, J. F. (2000). Knowledge Representation: Logical, Philosophical, and Computational Foundations. Brooks/Cole.
Acknowledgments
I extend sincere gratitude to Prof. Yucong Duan for his pioneering work on DIKWP Semantic Mathematics and for inspiring this exploration into its theoretical implications for natural language semantics and philosophical challenges.
Author Information
For further discussion on DIKWP Semantic Mathematics and its potential to map all natural language semantics, please contact [Author's Name] at [Contact Information].
Keywords: DIKWP Model, Semantic Mathematics, Natural Language Semantics, Sameness, Difference, Completeness, Prof. Yucong Duan, Wittgenstein, Laozi, Language Game, Axiomatics of Semantics, Artificial Intelligence, Semantic Modeling
转载本文请联系原作者获取授权，同时请注明本文来自段玉聪科学网博客。
链接地址：https://wap.sciencenet.cn/blog-3429562-1452812.html?mobile=1
收藏
