Abstract vs. Concrete¶
Local identifier:
xwkont:concept:abstract-concreteSlug:abstract-concreteEditorial status:reviewedCreated:2026-07-04Modified:2026-07-06
Scope Note¶
Selection rationale (per ADR-0018's admission bar): Abstract vs. Concrete is the third concept drafted from the 0.2.0 batch. Direct primary-source verification this session found an explicit, nameable Abstract (and, in some sources, Concrete) category in 5 of the 8 source ontologies (DOLCE abstract, SUMO Abstract, GFO Abstract/Concrete, YAMATO abstract/semi-abstract, GUM Abstraction) — one more source than TODO.md's seed claimed (the seed listed DOLCE, SUMO, GFO, YAMATO; this session's pass additionally found GUM's Abstraction class, previously uncredited). BFO and TUpper were confirmed to have no reified class of this kind; UFO was confirmed to have none at all (zero occurrences of "abstract" in the paper's full extracted text). See Source Definitions and Uncertainty.
This crosswalk compares each source ontology's own treatment of the abstract/concrete distinction as a top-level classificatory split — a class or disjoint-pair that sorts entities by whether they have a spatial/temporal location or physical embodiment — not any single source's full philosophy of abstracta (e.g., mathematical Platonism, nominalism about universals, or SUMO's own separate SetOrClass theory are each larger literatures than what is scoped here). Sources compared: BFO, DOLCE, SUMO, UFO, GFO, YAMATO, TUpper, GUM (per ADR-0015's 8-source scope).
Cross-cutting finding, established this session: this is a higher-level split than any of the 8 original crosswalks or time.md/space.md — it is not itself a concept-in-the-BFO/DOLCE sense of a single class so much as a top-level disjunction that several sources make explicit and one (BFO) conspicuously does not. Four of the five sources with an Abstract category (DOLCE, SUMO, GFO, GUM) define it structurally the same way: the complement of having a spatial/temporal location or embodiment (DOLCE: "do not have spatial nor temporal qualities"; SUMO: "cannot exist at a particular place and time without some physical encoding or embodiment"; GFO: "independent from time and space"; GUM: "exists in metaphorical or qualitative space rather than in physical space"). YAMATO alone further subdivides the space: a semi-abstract category (needs only time, not space) sits between physical and fully abstract, a three-way split none of the other sources make explicitly. BFO's absence of any literal "Abstract" class is a real, load-bearing omission, not an oversight — BFO instead handles much of the same ground through generically dependent continuant (patterns/content that can have multiple concrete copies, e.g. a PDF file's content), which is still a Continuant with the capacity for concrete realization, not a category defined by the absence of spatiotemporal location the way the other five sources define Abstract. See note-001.
Exclusions: this crosswalk does not address Information Artifact (already reviewed; BFO's generically dependent continuant and DOLCE's non-physical-endurant/information-object branch are directly relevant background already covered there) or Proposition/Content (a separate 0.2.0-batch candidate; several sources file Proposition as a subtype of their own Abstract category — noted below but not crosswalked here).
Core.ttl placement is deliberately left open at this draft stage, for the same reasons as time.md/space.md. No xwkont-core:Abstract/xwkont-core:Concrete split exists yet in data/ontology/core.ttl.
Modeling-shape decision (recorded 2026-07-04, in response to external review): this crosswalk records a recommendation — not a core.ttl edit, which still waits for reviewed status per this repository's governance model — that Abstract/Concrete be modeled as a class pair, a sibling-level split under xwkont-core:Entity alongside Continuant/Occurrent, not as a property or an editorial-only distinction. Rationale: (1) 5 of 8 sources (DOLCE, SUMO, GFO, YAMATO, GUM) define Abstract as a genuine formal class, not a property annotation, using the same criterion (absence of spatiotemporal location/embodiment); (2) quantity-amount-of-matter.md and proposition-content.md are now both drafted (this session), and both record SUMO/GFO subtypes of Abstract (Quantity, Proposition) as their own primary correspondences — a property-only or editorial-only treatment would leave those crosswalks' eventual core.ttl placements without a superclass to subclass from, whereas a class pair does not; (3) GFO's and SUMO's own formally exhaustive partitions (owl:unionOf/disjointDecomposition, note-004) are evidence this split functions the same way in source ontologies that Continuant/Occurrent already functions in XwkOnt's own core. This recommendation is not a settled fact about the source ontologies (unlike the crosswalk's other findings) — it is an XwkOnt-side modeling call, offered for maintainer confirmation at review time, per uncertainty-001.
Labels, Alternate Labels, and Source Terminology¶
| Role | Label or term | Source | Language | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| XwkOnt working label | Abstract vs. Concrete | XwkOnt | en |
Not yet in data/ontology/core.ttl — see Scope Note. |
| Alternate label | (no class literally named "Abstract" — see Uncertainty) | BFO | en |
Ground partially covered by generically dependent continuant (BFO_0000031), a Continuant subtype, not a spatiotemporal-location-defined split. |
| Source term | Abstract | DOLCE | en |
One of the four partition members of particular, alongside endurant, perdurant, quality. |
| Source term | Abstract (+ Quantity, Attribute, Relation, Proposition, List) | SUMO | en |
Direct subclass of Entity; disjointDecomposition into 5 named subclasses. |
| Alternate label | (no class — see Uncertainty) | UFO | en |
Zero occurrences of "abstract" in the 2021 paper's full extracted text. |
| Source term | Abstract (+ Concrete) | GFO | en |
Both direct subclasses of Individual, mutually disjoint, both disjoint from the third branch Space_time. |
| Source term | Abstract (+ semi-abstract, physical) | YAMATO | en |
A three-way split (physical/semi-abstract/abstract), the only source to interpose an intermediate category. |
| Alternate label | (informal only — see Uncertainty) | TUpper | en |
"Concrete or abstract" occurs only in object's own informal-semantics gloss, not as a defined predicate/class. |
| Source term | Abstraction | GUM | en |
Not credited in TODO.md's seed. Subclass of NonConsciousThing; disjoint from both SpatialTemporal (the shared Time/Space parent, per space.md) and Substance. |
Source Definitions and Contextual Notes¶
| Source | Term or identifier | Dimension | Claim type | Definition, quotation, or paraphrase | Reference | Locator | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BFO | (no class — ground partially covered by generically dependent continuant, BFO_0000031) | philosophical | non-equivalence | "(Elucidation) A generically dependent continuant is an entity that exists in virtue of the fact that there is at least one of what may be multiple copies which is the content or the pattern that multiple copies would share." Examples: "The pdf file on your laptop; the pdf file that is a copy thereof on my laptop... the content of a sentence; an engineering blueprint." rdfs:subClassOf continuant (BFO_0000002). |
xwkont:ref:bfo-2020 |
verified absence: bfo-core.ttl, full-text grep for "abstract" (case-insensitive) returned zero class labels or definitions, fetched and read directly 2026-07-04 |
BFO's generically dependent continuant is defined by multiple-copy sharing, not by absence of spatiotemporal location — a PDF file's content is generically dependent but each concrete copy still has a spatial location. This is a structurally different criterion from the other five sources' Abstract categories, not a synonym for them. |
| DOLCE | Abstract | philosophical | direct quotation | "The main characteristic of abstract entities is that they do not have spatial nor temporal qualities, and they are not qualities themselves. The only class of abstract entities we consider in the present version of the upper ontology is that of quality regions (or simply regions)... The other examples of abstract entities (sets and facts) are only indicative." rdfs:subClassOf particular; owl:disjointWith quality, owl:disjointWith perdurant. |
xwkont:ref:dolce-lite-owl |
verified: DOLCE-Lite.owl, class #abstract, fetched and read directly 2026-07-04 |
One of the four partition members of particular (alongside endurant, perdurant, quality) — region/temporal-region/space-region (already documented in time.md/space.md) are abstract's only populated subtypes in this module; DOLCE's own comment flags sets/facts as "only indicative," i.e. not formally modeled here. |
| SUMO | Abstract (+ Quantity, Attribute, Relation, Proposition, List) | technical | direct quotation | "Properties or qualities as distinguished from any particular embodiment of the properties/qualities in a physical medium. Instances of Abstract can be said to exist in the same sense as mathematical objects such as sets and relations, but they cannot exist at a particular place and time without some physical encoding or embodiment." (subclass Abstract Entity); (disjointDecomposition Abstract Quantity Attribute Relation Proposition List) — an exhaustive, mutually disjoint 5-way partition. |
xwkont:ref:sumo-niles-pease-2001 |
verified: current Merge.kif, fetched and read directly 2026-07-04 |
Direct sibling of Physical ("An entity that has a location in space-time," Merge.kif documentation) under Entity — the two are SUMO's own top-level split, already found in time.md (Time is Abstract-side) and space.md (Region is Physical-side) to place those two concepts on opposite sides of exactly this split. |
| UFO | (no class or property found) | technical | non-equivalence | Full-text search of the already-extracted 2021 Applied Ontology paper (9,048 lines) for "abstract" (case-insensitive) returned zero matches. | xwkont:ref:ufo-2021 |
verified absence: 2021 Applied Ontology paper, already-extracted text re-searched directly 2026-07-04 | Consistent with time.md's and space.md's findings that UFO's 2021 comprehensive paper is silent on several categories the other 7 sources treat as top-level — a recurring pattern for this source across all three 0.2.0-batch concepts drafted so far. |
| GFO | Abstract (+ Concrete) | philosophical | direct quotation | Abstract: "Abstract individuals are independent from time and space (they are not in time and space). Examples: the number '2' or pi." Concrete: "Concrete individuals have a relation to time or space (they are in time and space)." Both rdfs:subClassOf Individual; owl:disjointWith each other; both also owl:disjointWith Space_time. An explicit owl:unionOf (Abstract Concrete Space_time) axiom asserts these three exhaust Individual. |
xwkont:ref:gfo |
verified: modules/gfo-base.owl, classes Abstract/Concrete, fetched and read directly 2026-07-04 |
The cleanest, most explicit three-way exhaustive top-level partition of any source: every GFO Individual is Abstract, Concrete, or Space_time (itself already documented in time.md/space.md as Time's and Space's shared parent) — a directly quoted structural fact, not an inference. |
| YAMATO | Abstract (+ semi-abstract, physical) | philosophical | direct quotation | "We define a physical thing as something which needs time and space to exist, and introduce semi-abstract which needs only time to exist. Needless to say, there is nothing which requires only space to exist. Abstract things are defined as things that need neither time nor [space]." | xwkont:ref:yamato-mizoguchi-2010 |
verified: 2010 technical report, full extracted text re-searched directly 2026-07-04 | The only source among all 8 to interpose an intermediate semi-abstract category (needs time but not space) between fully physical and fully abstract — YAMATO's own text explicitly rules out the fourth logical combination ("nothing... requires only space to exist"), a genuine asymmetry between time-dependence and space-dependence worth preserving. |
| TUpper | (informal only, no defined predicate) | technical | non-equivalence | object's own informal-semantics gloss: "an object is a concrete or abstract thing that can participate in an activity." No concrete/abstract predicate or class is separately declared or defined anywhere in TUpper-Terms.html. |
xwkont:ref:tupper-colore |
verified absence: TUpper-Terms.html, full-text grep for "abstract" returned exactly one hit (this sentence), fetched and read directly 2026-07-04 |
Unlike Time's timepoint or Space's spatial_region/VoluminalRegion, Abstract/Concrete gets no reified treatment at all in TUpper — mentioned only in passing inside a different class's definition. |
| GUM | Abstraction | technical | direct quotation | "Something which exists in metaphorical or qualitative space rather than in physical space, e.g., truth." rdfs:subClassOf NonConsciousThing; owl:disjointWith SpatialTemporal, owl:disjointWith Substance. |
xwkont:ref:gum-owl |
verified: GUM-31.owl, class #Abstraction, fetched and read directly 2026-07-04 |
Not credited in TODO.md's seed — a genuine addition, mirroring the pattern already found for SUMO's/GUM's Time content in time.md. Abstraction is an explicit sibling of SpatialTemporal (the shared parent of GUM's Space/Time, per space.md's note-002) under NonConsciousThing — the same three-way structural shape as GFO's Abstract/Concrete/Space_time partition, though GUM's is not asserted as formally exhaustive the way GFO's owl:unionOf is. |
Source Ontology Correspondences¶
| Correspondence ID | Source ontology | Source term | Source identifier or IRI | Source version | Reference | Inclusion rationale |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
xwkont:correspondence:abstract-concrete:001 |
DOLCE | Abstract | http://www.loa-cnr.it/ontologies/DOLCE-Lite.owl#abstract |
DOLCE-Lite v397 (directly verified 2026-07-04) | xwkont:ref:dolce-lite-owl |
Direct terminological match; one of DOLCE's four root partition members. |
xwkont:correspondence:abstract-concrete:002 |
SUMO | Abstract | Abstract (SUMO term names are their own identifiers) |
Current Merge.kif (directly verified 2026-07-04) |
xwkont:ref:sumo-niles-pease-2001 |
Direct terminological match; SUMO's own top-level sibling of Physical. |
xwkont:correspondence:abstract-concrete:003 |
GFO | Abstract (+ Concrete) | https://w3id.org/gfo/base/Abstract, /Concrete |
GFO 2024-11-18 (directly verified 2026-07-04) | xwkont:ref:gfo |
Direct terminological match; the only source with both an Abstract and a named Concrete counterpart, formally exhaustive together with Space_time. |
xwkont:correspondence:abstract-concrete:004 |
YAMATO | Abstract (+ semi-abstract) | not applicable — informal prose category, no IRI scheme found for YAMATO's own vocabulary | 2010 technical report (directly re-verified 2026-07-04) | xwkont:ref:yamato-mizoguchi-2010 |
Direct terminological match; the only source with an intermediate semi-abstract category. |
xwkont:correspondence:abstract-concrete:005 |
GUM | Abstraction | http://www.ontospace.uni-bremen.de/ontology/stable/GUM-3.owl#Abstraction |
GUM 3.1 (directly verified 2026-07-04) | xwkont:ref:gum-owl |
Corrects TODO.md's seed, which omitted GUM; structurally close to GFO's three-way partition. |
xwkont:correspondence:abstract-concrete:006 |
BFO | (none — generically dependent continuant noted as related, not equivalent) | BFO_0000031 (noted for contrast only, not recorded as a correspondence) |
BFO 2020 (directly verified 2026-07-04) | xwkont:ref:bfo-2020 |
No correspondence recorded; BFO's nearest concept is defined by a different criterion (multiple-copy sharing, not absence of spatiotemporal location) — see Source Definitions and note-001. |
No UFO or TUpper correspondence is recorded — see Source Definitions and Uncertainty.
Semantic Comparison Notes¶
| Note ID | Dimension | Claim type | Note | Supporting references | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
note-001 |
philosophical | editorial observation | BFO's absence of a literal "Abstract" class is a substantive, not merely terminological, difference. The other five sources with an Abstract-like category (DOLCE, SUMO, GFO, YAMATO, GUM) all define it by the same criterion — absence of spatial/temporal location or physical embodiment. BFO's closest analog, generically dependent continuant, is defined by an entirely different criterion (capacity for multiple concrete copies to share the same content/pattern) and remains a Continuant throughout — it does not exclude spatiotemporal location the way the other five sources' Abstract categories do; a PDF file's content is generically dependent, but every copy of that content is still concretely located. This is the sharpest structural divergence in this crosswalk, directly comparable in kind (though not in shape) to the BFO-vs-rest divergence time.md's note-001 found for Time. |
xwkont:ref:bfo-2020, xwkont:ref:dolce-lite-owl, xwkont:ref:sumo-niles-pease-2001, xwkont:ref:gfo, xwkont:ref:yamato-mizoguchi-2010, xwkont:ref:gum-owl |
high |
note-002 |
philosophical | editorial observation | Three sources (GFO, GUM, and — via time.md/space.md's prior findings — implicitly SUMO through its own disjoint Physical/Abstract split) treat Abstract/Concrete as one half of an exhaustive top-level partition alongside their Time/Space-bearing branch: GFO's owl:unionOf (Abstract Concrete Space_time) is explicit and formal; GUM's Abstraction is owl:disjointWith SpatialTemporal (the shared Time/Space parent documented in space.md) though not asserted as jointly exhaustive with it the way GFO's union is. This directly resolves part of space.md's own forward-looking question about how Space/Time's classification interacts with the Abstract/Concrete split — GFO and GUM both make Time/Space and Abstract explicit structural siblings, not overlapping or nested categories. |
xwkont:ref:gfo, xwkont:ref:gum-owl |
high |
note-003 |
philosophical | editorial observation | YAMATO's three-way physical/semi-abstract/abstract split is asymmetric by the source's own explicit statement: time-dependence-without-space-dependence (semi-abstract) is a real, populated category, but space-dependence-without-time-dependence is explicitly ruled out ("there is nothing which requires only space to exist"). This is a genuine philosophical claim about the relative priority of time over space for existence, not an oversight or missing case — worth flagging since it bears on the Time/Space parity question space.md's note-003 already raised for this same source (YAMATO gives Space a more load-bearing structural role than Time in some respects, yet here treats Time as the more fundamental existence-condition). |
xwkont:ref:yamato-mizoguchi-2010 |
high |
note-004 |
technical | editorial observation | SUMO's Abstract is defined via an exhaustive disjointDecomposition into five named subclasses (Quantity, Attribute, Relation, Proposition, List) — a formally stronger and more explicit partition than any other source provides for its own Abstract-equivalent category's internal structure. Quantity, Attribute, and Relation are already crosswalked (quality.md for Attribute; relation.md for Relation); Proposition is a separate 0.2.0-batch candidate; List has no XwkOnt crosswalk counterpart yet. |
xwkont:ref:sumo-niles-pease-2001 |
high |
Mapping Assertions or Candidate Relations¶
| Mapping ID | Subject | Relation category | Object | predicate_id |
mapping_justification |
Status | Confidence | Rationale | Provenance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
xwkont:mapping:abstract-concrete:001 |
DOLCE:Abstract | close-match |
SUMO:Abstract | skos:closeMatch |
semapv:ManualMappingCuration |
candidate | high | Both are defined by the identical criterion (absence of spatial/temporal location or physical embodiment) and both are direct top-level siblings of their source's own physical/perdurant-bearing category. The closest structural pairing in this crosswalk. | xwkont:ref:dolce-lite-owl, xwkont:ref:sumo-niles-pease-2001 |
xwkont:mapping:abstract-concrete:002 |
DOLCE:Abstract | close-match |
GFO:Abstract | skos:closeMatch |
semapv:ManualMappingCuration |
candidate | high | Same absence-of-spatiotemporal-location criterion; GFO's explicit worked examples (the number "2", pi) are consistent with, though more mathematically specific than, DOLCE's own "sets and facts... only indicative" framing. | xwkont:ref:dolce-lite-owl, xwkont:ref:gfo |
xwkont:mapping:abstract-concrete:003 |
SUMO:Abstract | close-match |
GFO:Abstract | skos:closeMatch |
semapv:ManualMappingCuration |
candidate | high | Both formally exhaustive top-level partitions built on the same criterion; SUMO's is a 5-way disjointDecomposition, GFO's a 3-way owl:unionOf — different internal granularity, same outer criterion. |
xwkont:ref:sumo-niles-pease-2001, xwkont:ref:gfo |
xwkont:mapping:abstract-concrete:004 |
GFO:Abstract | close-match |
GUM:Abstraction | skos:closeMatch |
semapv:ManualMappingCuration |
candidate | high | Retained as close-match after explicit re-justification (2026-07-04 review pass) — unlike the region/quantity or metaphysical/linguistic-grounding pairs downgraded elsewhere in this batch (time.md mapping-006/mapping-008, space.md mapping-005/mapping-006), both sides here are the same formal kind: a reified top-level class, sibling to the source's Time/Space branch, defined by the identical criterion (absence of physical spatiotemporal location). GUM's "metaphorical or qualitative space" phrasing is a framing gloss on the same criterion, not a different criterion the way DOLCE's "region" vs. SUMO's "physical Object" was — hence close-match, not overlap. high confidence, not a hedge value: this is a directly analyzed, confidently-reached conclusion (same criterion, cosmetic framing difference only), not an open sourcing question. |
xwkont:ref:gfo, xwkont:ref:gum-owl |
xwkont:mapping:abstract-concrete:005 |
YAMATO:Abstract | close-match |
DOLCE:Abstract | skos:closeMatch |
semapv:ManualMappingCuration |
candidate | high | Same absence-of-time-and-space criterion for the Abstract node itself. YAMATO's additional semi-abstract intermediate tier has no DOLCE counterpart, but that divergence is already recorded separately (mapping-006, unknown) rather than diluting this mapping's confidence — the Abstract-to-Abstract correspondence itself is directly and confidently supported by each source's own criterion, not an open sourcing question. |
xwkont:ref:yamato-mizoguchi-2010, xwkont:ref:dolce-lite-owl |
xwkont:mapping:abstract-concrete:006 |
YAMATO:semi-abstract | unknown |
(no counterpart in any other of the 8 sources) | none | semapv:ManualMappingCuration |
candidate | low | Recorded explicitly as a genuine YAMATO-only category, not silently dropped — no other source interposes a needs-time-not-space intermediate category between physical and abstract. | xwkont:ref:yamato-mizoguchi-2010 |
xwkont:mapping:abstract-concrete:007 |
xwkont-core:Abstract (candidate) | explicit-non-equivalence |
BFO:Generically dependent continuant | skos:relatedMatch |
semapv:ManualMappingCuration |
candidate | high | Corrected from unknown/low-medium (this pass): this is not a case of insufficient evidence -- it is a confidently-reached non-equivalence finding. Related in subject matter (both concern content/pattern-like entities) but not a correspondence for the crosswalk's own Abstract/Concrete split, since BFO's category is defined by a different criterion (multiple-copy sharing, not absence of spatiotemporal location) and remains a Continuant. explicit-non-equivalence (used "to prevent accidental equivalence claims" per crosswalk-methodology.md) is the category this rationale actually describes; unknown ("evidence is insufficient") understated how clear this finding is. Recorded to make the non-equivalence explicit rather than silently omitting BFO. |
xwkont:ref:bfo-2020 |
xwkont:mapping:abstract-concrete:008 |
xwkont-core:Abstract (candidate) | unknown |
UFO | none | semapv:ManualMappingCuration |
candidate | low | No UFO correspondence identified; zero occurrences of "abstract" in the paper's full extracted text. | xwkont:ref:ufo-2021 |
xwkont:mapping:abstract-concrete:009 |
xwkont-core:Abstract (candidate) | unknown |
TUpper | none | semapv:ManualMappingCuration |
candidate | low | No reified TUpper correspondence identified; "concrete or abstract" appears only inside object's own informal gloss, not as a separately defined predicate. |
xwkont:ref:tupper-colore |
Uncertainty, Non-Equivalence, and Open Questions¶
| Item ID | Type | Description | Impact | Follow-up |
|---|---|---|---|---|
uncertainty-001 |
open-question | Should xwkont-core:Abstract/Concrete be modeled as a class pair in data/ontology/core.ttl, or as a property/editorial distinction? Recommendation recorded 2026-07-04 (see Scope Note's "Modeling-shape decision"): a class pair, sibling-level to Continuant/Occurrent under Entity — now that quantity-amount-of-matter.md and proposition-content.md are both drafted and both need an Abstract superclass for their own SUMO/GFO subtype correspondences, a property/editorial-only treatment would leave that dependency unresolved. This is a recommendation, not a final core.ttl edit — the actual class addition still waits for reviewed status. |
Blocks final core.ttl placement; does not block continuing this crosswalk's research/review. Recorded recommendation resolves the "unresolved modeling question" flagged by the 2026-07-04 external review. | Confirm or override this recommendation at review time, jointly with quantity-amount-of-matter.md's and proposition-content.md's own core.ttl placement decisions. |
uncertainty-002 |
non-equivalence | BFO has no class literally called "Abstract," confirmed by a full-text grep of bfo-core.ttl for "abstract" (case-insensitive), returning zero label or definition hits. generically dependent continuant is the nearest related category but is not treated as a correspondence — see note-001 and mapping-007. |
No BFO correspondence recorded (correspondence-006). |
None outstanding; this is treated as a confirmed, structural absence, not a gap needing further fetching. |
uncertainty-003 |
non-equivalence | UFO has no reified Abstract/Concrete category — confirmed by direct full-text search of the already-extracted 2021 paper, consistent with the same source's confirmed absence of both Time and Space content in time.md/space.md. |
No UFO correspondence recorded (mapping-008). |
Re-check if UFO-A/UFO-C literature (already flagged as unfetched for time.md/space.md/information-artifact.md) becomes accessible. |
uncertainty-004 |
open-question | GUM's Abstraction class was not in TODO.md's original seed for this concept — this session's direct verification found it. This is the third 0.2.0-batch concept in a row (after Time and Space) where GUM content was undercredited in the seed/matrix-derived candidate list, suggesting GUM's OWL file may be systematically under-surveyed relative to the other 7 sources. |
Does not affect this crosswalk's own GUM correspondence, but flags a possible pattern worth a dedicated check. | Consider a dedicated pass re-checking docs/evaluations/foundational-ontology-concept-terms-matrix.md's GUM tree against the full GUM-31.owl class list, once the 0.2.0 batch is further along — this is the third such gap found (after the two time.md/space.md GUM corrections). |
Provenance and References¶
xwkont:ref:bfo-2020— Basic Formal Ontology (BFO) 2020 / ISO/IEC 21838-2:2021 — verified absence directly againstbfo-core.ttl, 2026-07-04xwkont:ref:dolce-lite-owl— DOLCE-Lite OWL translation — verified directly againstDOLCE-Lite.owl, 2026-07-04xwkont:ref:sumo-niles-pease-2001— Towards a Standard Upper Ontology (Niles & Pease, 2001) — verified directly against current SUMOMerge.kif, 2026-07-04xwkont:ref:ufo-2021— UFO: Unified Foundational Ontology (Guizzardi et al., 2021) — verified absence directly (full-text re-search), 2026-07-04xwkont:ref:gfo— General Formal Ontology (GFO) — verified directly againstmodules/gfo-base.owl, 2026-07-04xwkont:ref:yamato-mizoguchi-2010— YAMATO 2010 technical report (Mizoguchi) — verified directly against the extracted PDF, 2026-07-04xwkont:ref:tupper-colore— TUpper COLORE formalization (Grüninger) — verified absence directly againstTUpper-Terms.html, 2026-07-04xwkont:ref:gum-owl— GUM 3.1 OWL (Bateman) — verified directly againstGUM-31.owl, 2026-07-04, correctingTODO.md's prior omission
Review History¶
| Review ID | Date | Outcome | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| — | 2026-07-04 | Not yet reviewed — draft |
Third concept of the 0.2.0 batch (ADR-0018), following time.md and space.md. All 8 sources checked directly against primary artifacts already cached from the prior two crosswalks' research (no new fetches needed beyond re-grepping existing local copies). Corrected TODO.md's seed by finding GUM's previously-uncredited Abstraction class — the third consecutive 0.2.0-batch concept where GUM content was undercredited (see uncertainty-004). Pending maintainer review before advancing to reviewed; core.ttl placement (uncertainty-001) is an open question to resolve at that review, likely alongside later 0.2.0-batch concepts that subtype Abstract in their own source ontologies. |
xwkont:review:abstract-concrete:2026-07-05:01 |
2026-07-05 | Passed — advanced draft → reviewed |
Checked against docs/governance/contributing.md's Review Checklist: scope preserved; every xwkont:ref:* citation resolves; correspondence/mapping/note/uncertainty ID numbering sequential (correspondences 001-006, mappings 001-009, notes 001-004, uncertainty 001-004); all confidence values within the ADR-0013 vocabulary. Correction (2026-07-06): this entry originally also claimed "the medium-high mappings/note each state a sourcing rationale" -- false on inspection during a full-corpus audit: note-003, mapping-004, and mapping-005 used medium-high with substantive/evidentiary rationales, not a sourcing-change justification; mapping-007 used unknown/low-medium for what its own rationale describes as a confidently-reached non-equivalence finding, not insufficient evidence. Fixed in the same audit pass: note-003, mapping-004, and mapping-005 raised to high confidence (each divergence/convergence is directly evidenced, not a sourcing gap); mapping-007 recategorized to explicit-non-equivalence at high confidence. See docs/methodology/crosswalk-runbook.md's governing principle for the rule this enforces. mapping-004's re-justified close-match retention (rather than downgrade) confirmed sound — genuinely different formal-kind mismatch pattern than the pairs downgraded in time.md/space.md. Confirmed the uncertainty-001 modeling-shape recommendation: xwkont-core:Abstract/Concrete will be modeled as a class pair, sibling-level to Continuant/Occurrent under Entity, per the Scope Note's rationale (5-of-8-source class-not-property pattern; quantity-amount-of-matter.md/proposition-content.md both need an Abstract superclass to subclass from). This confirmation is a recorded modeling decision, not a core.ttl edit — that Turtle-change work remains separately tracked, per docs/INFORMATION_ARCHITECTURE.md's scope-based definition of reviewed. Self-review, not independent third-party review. |
Future Work¶
- ~~Confirm or override the
uncertainty-001modeling-shape recommendation~~ — done 2026-07-05: confirmed as a class pair, sibling to Continuant/Occurrent (xwkont:review:abstract-concrete:2026-07-05:01); advanceddraft→reviewed. The actualcore.ttladdition remains separately-tracked Turtle-change work, jointly withquantity-amount-of-matter.md's andproposition-content.md's own placement decisions. - Consider a dedicated pass re-checking the matrix's GUM tree for further undercredited classes (
uncertainty-004). - ~~Create the Quantity/Amount of Matter crosswalk next~~ Done —
quantity-amount-of-matter.mdand the rest of the0.2.0batch are now drafted. mapping-004(GFO/GUM) re-justified and retained asclose-matchin a 2026-07-04 external review pass; see updated rationale.