SIST ISO 24617-14:2024
(Main)Language resource management — Semantic annotation framework (SemAF) — Part 14: Spatial semantics
Language resource management — Semantic annotation framework (SemAF) — Part 14: Spatial semantics
This document extends ISO 24617-7:2020, which specifies ways of annotating spatial information in natural language such as English, by establishing a formal semantics for its abstract syntax. The task of the proposed semantics is of two kinds:
a) translation of annotation structures to semantic forms;
b) model-theoretic interpretation of semantic forms.
Semantic forms are represented in a type-theoretic first-order logic. These semantic forms are then interpreted with respect to a model for part of the world to which an annotated language is referentially, or denotationally, anchored.
NOTE The basic framework and content of this document is based on Reference [1].
Gestion des ressources linguistiques — Cadre d'annotation sémantique (SemAF) — Partie 14: Sémantique spatiale
Le présent document étend l’ISO 24617-7:2020, qui spécifie des manières d’annoter l’information spatiale en langue naturelle, comme l’anglais, en établissant une sémantique formelle pour sa syntaxe abstraite. La tâche de la sémantique proposée est de deux natures:
a) transposition des structures d’annotation en formes sémantiques;
b) interprétation des formes logiques en théorie des modèles.
Les formes sémantiques sont représentées dans une logique du premier ordre de théorie des types. Ces formes sémantiques sont ensuite interprétées par rapport à un modèle d’une partie du monde auquel une langue annotée est rattachée par référence ou par dénotation.
NOTE Le cadre de base et le contenu du présent document sont fondés sur la Référence[1].
Upravljanje jezikovnih virov - Ogrodje za semantično označevanje (SemAF) - 14. del: Prostorska semantika
Ta dokument dopolnjuje standard ISO 24617-7:2020, ki določa način označevanja prostorskih informacij v naravnem jeziku, kot je angleščina, z določitvijo formalne semantike za njegovo abstraktno sintakso. Predlagana semantika ima dve različni nalogi:
a) pretvorba struktur oznak v semantične oblike;
b) modelno-teoretična interpretacija semantičnih oblik.
Semantične oblike so predstavljene v tipsko-teoretični logiki prvega reda. Te semantične oblike se nato interpretirajo v skladu z modelom za del sveta, s katerim je označeni jezik referencialno ali denotacijsko povezan.
OPOMBA: Osnovno ogrodje in vsebina tega dokumenta temeljita na sklicevanju [1].
General Information
Standards Content (Sample)
SLOVENSKI STANDARD
01-oktober-2024
Upravljanje jezikovnih virov - Ogrodje za semantično označevanje (SemAF) - 14.
del: Prostorska semantika
Language resource management — Semantic annotation framework (SemAF) — Part
14: Spatial semantics
Gestion des ressources linguistiques — Cadre d'annotation sémantique (SemAF) —
Partie 14: Sémantique spatiale
Ta slovenski standard je istoveten z: ISO 24617-14:2023
ICS:
01.020 Terminologija (načela in Terminology (principles and
koordinacija) coordination)
01.140.20 Informacijske vede Information sciences
35.240.30 Uporabniške rešitve IT v IT applications in information,
informatiki, dokumentiranju in documentation and
založništvu publishing
2003-01.Slovenski inštitut za standardizacijo. Razmnoževanje celote ali delov tega standarda ni dovoljeno.
INTERNATIONAL ISO
STANDARD 24617-14
First edition
2023-06
Language resource management —
Semantic annotation framework
(SemAF) —
Part 14:
Spatial semantics
Gestion des ressources linguistiques — Cadre d'annotation
sémantique (SemAF) —
Partie 14: Sémantique spatiale
Reference number
© ISO 2023
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, or required in the context of its implementation, no part of this publication may
be reproduced or utilized otherwise in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, or posting on
the internet or an intranet, without prior written permission. Permission can be requested from either ISO at the address below
or ISO’s member body in the country of the requester.
ISO copyright office
CP 401 • Ch. de Blandonnet 8
CH-1214 Vernier, Geneva
Phone: +41 22 749 01 11
Email: copyright@iso.org
Website: www.iso.org
Published in Switzerland
ii
Contents Page
Foreword .iv
Introduction .v
1 Scope . 1
2 Normative references . 1
3 Terms and definitions . 1
4 Metamodel . 2
5 Semantic types . 4
5.1 General . 4
5.2 Basic types . 4
5.2.1 General . 4
5.2.2 Extended basic types . 4
5.2.3 Functional types . 4
5.3 Place and spatial entity . 5
5.4 Paths . 6
6 Events and paths generated from events . 7
6.1 General . 7
6.2 Two types of verb constructions . 7
6.3 Typing event-paths . 8
7 Semantic interpretation of annotation structures . 9
7.1 Overview . 9
7.2 Semantic forms . . . 9
7.3 Model theory . 11
7.3.1 General . 11
7.3.2 Interpretation .12
Bibliography .14
iii
Foreword
ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a worldwide federation of national standards
bodies (ISO member bodies). The work of preparing International Standards is normally carried out
through ISO technical committees. Each member body interested in a subject for which a technical
committee has been established has the right to be represented on that committee. International
organizations, governmental and non-governmental, in liaison with ISO, also take part in the work.
ISO collaborates closely with the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) on all matters of
electrotechnical standardization.
The procedures used to develop this document and those intended for its further maintenance are
described in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1. In particular, the different approval criteria needed for the
different types of ISO document should be noted. This document was drafted in accordance with the
editorial rules of the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 (see www.iso.org/directives).
ISO draws attention to the possibility that the implementation of this document may involve the use
of (a) patent(s). ISO takes no position concerning the evidence, validity or applicability of any claimed
patent rights in respect thereof. As of the date of publication of this document, ISO had not received
notice of (a) patent(s) which may be required to implement this document. However, implementers are
cautioned that this may not represent the latest information, which may be obtained from the patent
database available at www.iso.org/patents. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all
such patent rights.
Any trade name used in this document is information given for the convenience of users and does not
constitute an endorsement.
For an explanation of the voluntary nature of standards, the meaning of ISO specific terms and
expressions related to conformity assessment, as well as information about ISO’s adherence to
the World Trade Organization (WTO) principles in the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), see
www.iso.org/iso/foreword.html.
This document was prepared by Technical Committee ISO/TC 37, Language and terminology,
Subcommittee SC 4, Language resource management.
A list of all parts in the ISO 24617 series can be found on the ISO website.
Any feedback or questions on this document should be directed to the user’s national standards body. A
complete listing of these bodies can be found at www.iso.org/members.html.
iv
Introduction
This document establishes a semantic ground for supporting ISO 24617-7 (spatial information), which
specifies an abstract syntax for the annotation of spatial information in language. It also specifies a
way of translating the annotation structures generated by the abstract syntax of ISO 24617-7 into well-
formed semantic forms. These semantic forms are represented in a type-theoretic first-order logic and
made interpretable according to a model.
This document:
— validates the abstract specification of ISO 24617-7 for the annotation of spatial information in
language on semantic grounds;
— specifies an interoperable format for interpreting spatial information, both static and dynamic.
Dynamic spatial information involves spatio-temporal information as well as information about motions
in space and time. This document aims at satisfying such needs. An understanding of information
in natural language is necessary for many computational linguistics and artificial intelligence (AI)
applications. An explicit semantics is necessary for the specification provided by ISO 24617-7, as the
representations created in accord with that language will not have a significant impact on AI and
automatic inference without explicit interpretation.
v
INTERNATIONAL STANDARD ISO 24617-14:2023(E)
Language resource management — Semantic annotation
framework (SemAF) —
Part 14:
Spatial semantics
1 Scope
This document extends ISO 24617-7:2020, which specifies ways of annotating spatial information in
natural language such as English, by establishing a formal semantics for its abstract syntax. The task of
the proposed semantics is of two kinds:
a) translation of annotation structures to semantic forms;
b) model-theoretic interpretation of semantic forms.
Semantic forms are represented in a type-theoretic first-order logic. These semantic forms are then
interpreted with respect to a model for part of the world to which an annotated language is referentially,
or denotationally, anchored.
NOTE The basic framework and content of this document is based on Reference [1].
2 Normative references
The following documents are referred to in the text in such a way that some or all of their content
constitutes requirements of this document. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For
undated references, the latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
ISO 24617-7:2020, Language resource management — Semantic annotation framework — Part 7: Spatial
information
3 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions apply.
ISO and IEC maintain terminology databases for use in standardization at the following addresses:
— ISO Online browsing platform: available at https:// www .iso .org/ obp
— IEC Electropedia: available at https:// www .electropedia .org/
3.1
annotation structure
information structure created by marking up some linguistic expressions with relevant (semantic)
information
Note 1 to entry: ISO 24617-7:2020, for instance, creates such annotation structures by marking up place names or
motions and their spatial relations with relevant spatial information.
3.2
eigenplace
eigenspace
region or path occupied by an object
Note 1 to entry: A region may be considered as a particular finite path matching to an interval [x,x] such that its
start and endpoint match or are identical. In that case, a region is considered as a point.
3.3
event-path
region of space occupied by a mover (moving object) throughout an event
3.4
first-order logic
formal language, artificially built for reasoning, with the values of its terms, particularly variables,
ranging over individual objects only
Note 1 to entry: Second-order variables such as P, which ranges over properties of an individual, are temporarily
introduced to allow the λ-operation in the process of deriving semantic forms (3.7), see 7.2, Note and Example 2,
b) and c).
3.5
interpretation
function that maps a semantic form (3.7) to its denotation
Note 1 to entry: The interpretation function is represented by ⟦ ⟧ and, for each semantic form a, its denotation or
the value of the interpretation, is represented by ⟦σ(a)⟧.
Note 2 to entry: In a model-theoretic semantics, the interpretation function ⟦ ⟧ is constrained by a model M and,
M
for each semantic form a and a model M, such an interpretation is represented by ⟦σ(a)⟧ .
3.6
model M
set-theoretical construct that represents part of the real or possible world denoted by semantic forms
(3.7)
3.7
semantic form
logical form
representation of the semantic content of an annotation structure (3.1) of expressions in natural
language
Note 1 to entry: The semantic form of an annotation structure a is represented by σ(a), where σ is a function that
maps an annotation structure a to a semantic form that carries the semantic content of a.
Note 2 to entry: Semantic forms are often called “logical forms” because semantic forms are represented by a
logical language such as first-order logic (3.4).
3.8
type
semantic type
kind or sort of an object denoted by a linguistic expression
4 Metamodel
This document shall be used together with ISO 24617-7:2020.
The metamodel presented in this clause outlines the basic semantic structure for the abstract syntax of
ISO 24617-7 for easy reference, which specifies an annotation scheme for the markup of spatial relations,
both static and dynamic, as expressed in text and other media. This specification distinguishes the
following six major categories of spatially relevant elements for markup in natural language:
a) spatial entities: natural or artificial locations in the world that include places, paths and event-
paths, as well as individual entities participating in spatial relations;
b) spatial relators (signals): linguistic markers that establish relations between places and spatial
entities;
c) spatial measures: quantitative information associated with spatial entities;
d) events and motions: eventualities either static or dynamic;
NOTE Unlike static eventualities such as referring to states, dynamic eventualities (motions) involve
movement from one location to another triggering a trajectory (event-path).
e) static spatial relations: specific qualitative configurational, orientational and metric relations
between objects;
f) dynamic spatial relations: movement of an object triggered by a motion from one location to
another creating an event-path.
The corresponding metamodel for these categories is represented in Figure 1.
NOTE Source: Reference [2] with some modifications.
Figure 1 — Metamodel
Qualitative spatial link (qslink) and orientation link (olink) each relate one spatial object to another. In
contrast, qslink_e and olink_e relate an eventuality of a special type such as “live” to a location such as
“Boston” with a spatial signal “in”.
These categories are constrained by semantic types. Each of the categories listed in the abstract syntax
of isoSpace is shown to match one of the semantic types defined in Clause 5.
5 Semantic types
5.1 General
The semantics of isoSpace is formulated on the basis of its abstract syntax, but its interpretation rules
apply to the semantic forms which are derived from annotation structures as represented by a concrete
syntax. Hence, there are two levels of interpretation that shall be identified when defining a formal
semantics of an annotation structure, as applied to linguistic expressions in natural language:
— language to abstract model;
— concrete model to abstract model.
This clause focuses on the first mapping. It articulates the underlying semantics of the entities
represented in the metamodel in type-theoretic terms and demonstrates the composition of examples
within each category. Clause 6 illustrates the second mapping, from the annotation structure
(implemented as a concrete syntactic expression) into the abstract model.
5.2 Basic types
5.2.1 General
The model-theoretic semantics of ISO 24617-7:2020 is based on a theory of semantic types, which sorts
out various objects denoted by linguistic expressions or their annotation structures. It is assumed that
a model is characterized with the basic types in 5.2.2 and the functional types in 5.2.3, corresponding
generally to the categories in Figure 1. Following Reference [3], the list of basic types is extended to
eight basic types from the two basic types (e, the type of objects, and t, the type of truth values) in
Montague Semantics (see Reference [4]) as given in 5.2.2.
5.2.2 Extended basic types
The basic types are as follows:
a) t, the type of truth values;
b) e, the type of objects (entities);
c) i, the type of time points;
d) p, the type of spatial points;
e) v, the type of events;
f) m, the type of measures;
g) int, the type of intervals;
h) vec, the type of vectors.
Further, following Reference [3], the group operator • (bullet) is introduced, which applies to a type to
form a group type, e.g. the group of points, p•.
5.2.3 Functional types
Additional types can be constructed with conventional binary type constructors: → and ⨉. From these,
the standard set of functional types is defined, e.g. e → t, v → t, p → t. Further, a semi-lattice of types
is defined, where ⊑ is a quasi-ordering on the set of types, such that, for types a, b, c: a ⊑ b and b ⊑
c implies a ⊑ c; and a ⊑ a. This introduces the subtyping relation between types: if a ⊑ b, then a is a
subtype of b.
The following typical functional types are derived with the binary type constructor →:
a) e → t, the type of properties of an individual;
b) p → t, the type r of regions;
c) v → t, the type ε of eventuality descriptors;
d) int → p, the type π of (static) paths;
e) int → vec, the type π of vector-based paths.
v
Following the neo-Davidsonian semantics, “John walks” can be represented as [walk(e) ˄ agent(e,j)]
such that “John” is annotated as being the agent of the event “walk”. Here, the variable e refers to an
eventuality of type v, while the verb is an eventuality descriptor denoting a predicate of type v → t or ε.
The individual constant j referring to John is of type e. As for the type of static paths and vector-based
paths, see 5.4.
5.3 Place and spatial entity
The “PLACE” tag is used for annotating geolocations, such as Germany and Boston, as well as geographic
entities such as lakes and mountains. Further, administrative entities that are registered as geolocations
are also tagged as PLACE, e.g. towns and counties. Hence, in Example 1, the qualitative spatial relation
between the two entities is a relation between places. Both “Gothenburg” and “Sweden” are marked
as PLACE, which is typed as “region”. A region, r, is defined as a set of points, p → t. This differs from
Reference [3], where regions are defined as a subtype of p•, while • is a group operator over basic types,
but either analysis can be adopted for these purposes.
NOTE 1 To differentiate tag names from common nouns, tag names are represented in upper case, e.g. PLACE
is a tag for places like Gothenburg or Sweden.
The spatial words such as “location”, “place”, and “region” are all used equivalently. In annotation, they
are all tagged PLACE. Semantically, they do not denote spatial points of type p. For example, Gothenburg
refers to a location, place or region of type p → t.
Further, a qualitative spatial mereo-topological relation within RCC8 (the Region Connection Calculus 8
qualitative spatial relations, see Reference [5]) is typed as a relation between regions: i.e. qslink: r → (r
→ t) for qualitative spatial link, formulated in ISO 24617-7:2020.
EXAMPLE 1
a) [Gothenburg] is [in] [Sweden] .
pl1 s1 pl2
b) ⟦Gothenburg⟧ = G, < G: p→ t>
c) ⟦Sweden⟧ = S, < S: p→ t >
d) ⟦in⟧ = λyλx[in(x,y)], < in: r → (r → t)>
e) in(G, S)
For many spatial relations in language, however, the entities involved are not inherently typed as
locations or places. For example, humans and everyday objects carry a primary type of e, which are
subtyped or identified in these documents as spatialEntity. When they participate in spatial relations,
a type coerc
...
INTERNATIONAL ISO
STANDARD 24617-14
First edition
2023-06
Language resource management —
Semantic annotation framework
(SemAF) —
Part 14:
Spatial semantics
Gestion des ressources linguistiques — Cadre d'annotation
sémantique (SemAF) —
Partie 14: Sémantique spatiale
Reference number
© ISO 2023
All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, or required in the context of its implementation, no part of this publication may
be reproduced or utilized otherwise in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, or posting on
the internet or an intranet, without prior written permission. Permission can be requested from either ISO at the address below
or ISO’s member body in the country of the requester.
ISO copyright office
CP 401 • Ch. de Blandonnet 8
CH-1214 Vernier, Geneva
Phone: +41 22 749 01 11
Email: copyright@iso.org
Website: www.iso.org
Published in Switzerland
ii
Contents Page
Foreword .iv
Introduction .v
1 Scope . 1
2 Normative references . 1
3 Terms and definitions . 1
4 Metamodel . 2
5 Semantic types . 4
5.1 General . 4
5.2 Basic types . 4
5.2.1 General . 4
5.2.2 Extended basic types . 4
5.2.3 Functional types . 4
5.3 Place and spatial entity . 5
5.4 Paths . 6
6 Events and paths generated from events . 7
6.1 General . 7
6.2 Two types of verb constructions . 7
6.3 Typing event-paths . 8
7 Semantic interpretation of annotation structures . 9
7.1 Overview . 9
7.2 Semantic forms . . . 9
7.3 Model theory . 11
7.3.1 General . 11
7.3.2 Interpretation .12
Bibliography .14
iii
Foreword
ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) is a worldwide federation of national standards
bodies (ISO member bodies). The work of preparing International Standards is normally carried out
through ISO technical committees. Each member body interested in a subject for which a technical
committee has been established has the right to be represented on that committee. International
organizations, governmental and non-governmental, in liaison with ISO, also take part in the work.
ISO collaborates closely with the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) on all matters of
electrotechnical standardization.
The procedures used to develop this document and those intended for its further maintenance are
described in the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 1. In particular, the different approval criteria needed for the
different types of ISO document should be noted. This document was drafted in accordance with the
editorial rules of the ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 (see www.iso.org/directives).
ISO draws attention to the possibility that the implementation of this document may involve the use
of (a) patent(s). ISO takes no position concerning the evidence, validity or applicability of any claimed
patent rights in respect thereof. As of the date of publication of this document, ISO had not received
notice of (a) patent(s) which may be required to implement this document. However, implementers are
cautioned that this may not represent the latest information, which may be obtained from the patent
database available at www.iso.org/patents. ISO shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all
such patent rights.
Any trade name used in this document is information given for the convenience of users and does not
constitute an endorsement.
For an explanation of the voluntary nature of standards, the meaning of ISO specific terms and
expressions related to conformity assessment, as well as information about ISO’s adherence to
the World Trade Organization (WTO) principles in the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), see
www.iso.org/iso/foreword.html.
This document was prepared by Technical Committee ISO/TC 37, Language and terminology,
Subcommittee SC 4, Language resource management.
A list of all parts in the ISO 24617 series can be found on the ISO website.
Any feedback or questions on this document should be directed to the user’s national standards body. A
complete listing of these bodies can be found at www.iso.org/members.html.
iv
Introduction
This document establishes a semantic ground for supporting ISO 24617-7 (spatial information), which
specifies an abstract syntax for the annotation of spatial information in language. It also specifies a
way of translating the annotation structures generated by the abstract syntax of ISO 24617-7 into well-
formed semantic forms. These semantic forms are represented in a type-theoretic first-order logic and
made interpretable according to a model.
This document:
— validates the abstract specification of ISO 24617-7 for the annotation of spatial information in
language on semantic grounds;
— specifies an interoperable format for interpreting spatial information, both static and dynamic.
Dynamic spatial information involves spatio-temporal information as well as information about motions
in space and time. This document aims at satisfying such needs. An understanding of information
in natural language is necessary for many computational linguistics and artificial intelligence (AI)
applications. An explicit semantics is necessary for the specification provided by ISO 24617-7, as the
representations created in accord with that language will not have a significant impact on AI and
automatic inference without explicit interpretation.
v
INTERNATIONAL STANDARD ISO 24617-14:2023(E)
Language resource management — Semantic annotation
framework (SemAF) —
Part 14:
Spatial semantics
1 Scope
This document extends ISO 24617-7:2020, which specifies ways of annotating spatial information in
natural language such as English, by establishing a formal semantics for its abstract syntax. The task of
the proposed semantics is of two kinds:
a) translation of annotation structures to semantic forms;
b) model-theoretic interpretation of semantic forms.
Semantic forms are represented in a type-theoretic first-order logic. These semantic forms are then
interpreted with respect to a model for part of the world to which an annotated language is referentially,
or denotationally, anchored.
NOTE The basic framework and content of this document is based on Reference [1].
2 Normative references
The following documents are referred to in the text in such a way that some or all of their content
constitutes requirements of this document. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For
undated references, the latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
ISO 24617-7:2020, Language resource management — Semantic annotation framework — Part 7: Spatial
information
3 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions apply.
ISO and IEC maintain terminology databases for use in standardization at the following addresses:
— ISO Online browsing platform: available at https:// www .iso .org/ obp
— IEC Electropedia: available at https:// www .electropedia .org/
3.1
annotation structure
information structure created by marking up some linguistic expressions with relevant (semantic)
information
Note 1 to entry: ISO 24617-7:2020, for instance, creates such annotation structures by marking up place names or
motions and their spatial relations with relevant spatial information.
3.2
eigenplace
eigenspace
region or path occupied by an object
Note 1 to entry: A region may be considered as a particular finite path matching to an interval [x,x] such that its
start and endpoint match or are identical. In that case, a region is considered as a point.
3.3
event-path
region of space occupied by a mover (moving object) throughout an event
3.4
first-order logic
formal language, artificially built for reasoning, with the values of its terms, particularly variables,
ranging over individual objects only
Note 1 to entry: Second-order variables such as P, which ranges over properties of an individual, are temporarily
introduced to allow the λ-operation in the process of deriving semantic forms (3.7), see 7.2, Note and Example 2,
b) and c).
3.5
interpretation
function that maps a semantic form (3.7) to its denotation
Note 1 to entry: The interpretation function is represented by ⟦ ⟧ and, for each semantic form a, its denotation or
the value of the interpretation, is represented by ⟦σ(a)⟧.
Note 2 to entry: In a model-theoretic semantics, the interpretation function ⟦ ⟧ is constrained by a model M and,
M
for each semantic form a and a model M, such an interpretation is represented by ⟦σ(a)⟧ .
3.6
model M
set-theoretical construct that represents part of the real or possible world denoted by semantic forms
(3.7)
3.7
semantic form
logical form
representation of the semantic content of an annotation structure (3.1) of expressions in natural
language
Note 1 to entry: The semantic form of an annotation structure a is represented by σ(a), where σ is a function that
maps an annotation structure a to a semantic form that carries the semantic content of a.
Note 2 to entry: Semantic forms are often called “logical forms” because semantic forms are represented by a
logical language such as first-order logic (3.4).
3.8
type
semantic type
kind or sort of an object denoted by a linguistic expression
4 Metamodel
This document shall be used together with ISO 24617-7:2020.
The metamodel presented in this clause outlines the basic semantic structure for the abstract syntax of
ISO 24617-7 for easy reference, which specifies an annotation scheme for the markup of spatial relations,
both static and dynamic, as expressed in text and other media. This specification distinguishes the
following six major categories of spatially relevant elements for markup in natural language:
a) spatial entities: natural or artificial locations in the world that include places, paths and event-
paths, as well as individual entities participating in spatial relations;
b) spatial relators (signals): linguistic markers that establish relations between places and spatial
entities;
c) spatial measures: quantitative information associated with spatial entities;
d) events and motions: eventualities either static or dynamic;
NOTE Unlike static eventualities such as referring to states, dynamic eventualities (motions) involve
movement from one location to another triggering a trajectory (event-path).
e) static spatial relations: specific qualitative configurational, orientational and metric relations
between objects;
f) dynamic spatial relations: movement of an object triggered by a motion from one location to
another creating an event-path.
The corresponding metamodel for these categories is represented in Figure 1.
NOTE Source: Reference [2] with some modifications.
Figure 1 — Metamodel
Qualitative spatial link (qslink) and orientation link (olink) each relate one spatial object to another. In
contrast, qslink_e and olink_e relate an eventuality of a special type such as “live” to a location such as
“Boston” with a spatial signal “in”.
These categories are constrained by semantic types. Each of the categories listed in the abstract syntax
of isoSpace is shown to match one of the semantic types defined in Clause 5.
5 Semantic types
5.1 General
The semantics of isoSpace is formulated on the basis of its abstract syntax, but its interpretation rules
apply to the semantic forms which are derived from annotation structures as represented by a concrete
syntax. Hence, there are two levels of interpretation that shall be identified when defining a formal
semantics of an annotation structure, as applied to linguistic expressions in natural language:
— language to abstract model;
— concrete model to abstract model.
This clause focuses on the first mapping. It articulates the underlying semantics of the entities
represented in the metamodel in type-theoretic terms and demonstrates the composition of examples
within each category. Clause 6 illustrates the second mapping, from the annotation structure
(implemented as a concrete syntactic expression) into the abstract model.
5.2 Basic types
5.2.1 General
The model-theoretic semantics of ISO 24617-7:2020 is based on a theory of semantic types, which sorts
out various objects denoted by linguistic expressions or their annotation structures. It is assumed that
a model is characterized with the basic types in 5.2.2 and the functional types in 5.2.3, corresponding
generally to the categories in Figure 1. Following Reference [3], the list of basic types is extended to
eight basic types from the two basic types (e, the type of objects, and t, the type of truth values) in
Montague Semantics (see Reference [4]) as given in 5.2.2.
5.2.2 Extended basic types
The basic types are as follows:
a) t, the type of truth values;
b) e, the type of objects (entities);
c) i, the type of time points;
d) p, the type of spatial points;
e) v, the type of events;
f) m, the type of measures;
g) int, the type of intervals;
h) vec, the type of vectors.
Further, following Reference [3], the group operator • (bullet) is introduced, which applies to a type to
form a group type, e.g. the group of points, p•.
5.2.3 Functional types
Additional types can be constructed with conventional binary type constructors: → and ⨉. From these,
the standard set of functional types is defined, e.g. e → t, v → t, p → t. Further, a semi-lattice of types
is defined, where ⊑ is a quasi-ordering on the set of types, such that, for types a, b, c: a ⊑ b and b ⊑
c implies a ⊑ c; and a ⊑ a. This introduces the subtyping relation between types: if a ⊑ b, then a is a
subtype of b.
The following typical functional types are derived with the binary type constructor →:
a) e → t, the type of properties of an individual;
b) p → t, the type r of regions;
c) v → t, the type ε of eventuality descriptors;
d) int → p, the type π of (static) paths;
e) int → vec, the type π of vector-based paths.
v
Following the neo-Davidsonian semantics, “John walks” can be represented as [walk(e) ˄ agent(e,j)]
such that “John” is annotated as being the agent of the event “walk”. Here, the variable e refers to an
eventuality of type v, while the verb is an eventuality descriptor denoting a predicate of type v → t or ε.
The individual constant j referring to John is of type e. As for the type of static paths and vector-based
paths, see 5.4.
5.3 Place and spatial entity
The “PLACE” tag is used for annotating geolocations, such as Germany and Boston, as well as geographic
entities such as lakes and mountains. Further, administrative entities that are registered as geolocations
are also tagged as PLACE, e.g. towns and counties. Hence, in Example 1, the qualitative spatial relation
between the two entities is a relation between places. Both “Gothenburg” and “Sweden” are marked
as PLACE, which is typed as “region”. A region, r, is defined as a set of points, p → t. This differs from
Reference [3], where regions are defined as a subtype of p•, while • is a group operator over basic types,
but either analysis can be adopted for these purposes.
NOTE 1 To differentiate tag names from common nouns, tag names are represented in upper case, e.g. PLACE
is a tag for places like Gothenburg or Sweden.
The spatial words such as “location”, “place”, and “region” are all used equivalently. In annotation, they
are all tagged PLACE. Semantically, they do not denote spatial points of type p. For example, Gothenburg
refers to a location, place or region of type p → t.
Further, a qualitative spatial mereo-topological relation within RCC8 (the Region Connection Calculus 8
qualitative spatial relations, see Reference [5]) is typed as a relation between regions: i.e. qslink: r → (r
→ t) for qualitative spatial link, formulated in ISO 24617-7:2020.
EXAMPLE 1
a) [Gothenburg] is [in] [Sweden] .
pl1 s1 pl2
b) ⟦Gothenburg⟧ = G, < G: p→ t>
c) ⟦Sweden⟧ = S, < S: p→ t >
d) ⟦in⟧ = λyλx[in(x,y)], < in: r → (r → t)>
e) in(G, S)
For many spatial relations in language, however, the entities involved are not inherently typed as
locations or places. For example, humans and everyday objects carry a primary type of e, which are
subtyped or identified in these documents as spatialEntity. When they participate in spatial relations,
a type coercion function, 𝓛, is assumed to operate over an entity (or a collection of entities) and returns
the spatial region associated with that entity (or entities), i.e. its location in space. The type for this
localization operator, 𝓛, is: e → (p → t).
Example 2 demonstrates how this operator coerces an entity to the type required by the spatial
relation, namely r.
EXAMPLE 2
a) [Robin] in [Sweden] .
se1 p
b) ⟦Robin⟧ = R, < R: e >
c) ⟦Sweden⟧ = S, < S: p→ t >
d) 𝓛(R) = λx[loc(x,R)], < x: p, 𝓛: e → (p →
...
Questions, Comments and Discussion
Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.
Loading comments...