Robert J. Rovetto

How is causality/causation associated with parthood? And do parts and their whole interact in distinct causal manners? I introduce a novel concept I call ‘mereocausality’ and its cognates, merging two foundational topics in theoretical and practical disciplines: causality and parthood (or mereology). This paper provides a preliminary exploration, offering concepts, questions and terminology for what can be a new branch of inquiry, casual mereology and causal mereotopology. These two topics have been of great personal intellectual interest, and after a few years (as early as 2014) of sitting on this idea and drafted papers, I here express it. Future work will involve a more structured and rigorous investigation, developing the basic ideas presented here. I hope to produce a conceptual system for exploring the intersection of causality, mereology and topology. As a personal project and unfunded to date, formal support is desired to pursue this promising line of research.

The ethics of artificial intelligence (AI) is a research topic with both theoretical and practical significance. However, the ethical and moral aspects of conceptual, ontological, semantic, and knowledge modeling, more specifically, and which are sometimes found in AI applications, is not being given sufficient attention. I argue that it should. Whether considering using or developing these meaning-focused models, there are ethical aspects. This paper offers a preliminary outline about this potentially new research field, discussing: some questions and areas of concern, their significance; scenarios of ethical import, and initial ethical guidelines. A focus area, potential case study, and lens through which to see the ethical significance at hand, is ontologies, with emphasis on the most abstract ontologies (so-called generic, foundational, top-level or upper ontologies). This would aim to show the ethical import of highly abstract (often philosophical) ontological choices, assumptions, and their effects on data, developers, users, and society. In particular, I stress the need for critical examination of such models, their content, their intended meanings, assumptions, ideologies, as well as the development process. Both the ethics of, and ethics in, these activities are, therefore, of interest. Topics in the ethics of AI that are relevant include: transparency, bias, data-sharing, privacy, control over data, etc. This paper thereby contributes to the ethics of AI, as well as the ethics of information, of knowledge managment and relevant topics by developing and discussing the ethics of ontology (and similar systems). Future development will refine and add to the ideas expressed in this paper.

This paper discusses some ethical and moral considerations for contemporary ontology development. It explores potential ethical implications of computational ontologies, giving specific examples and scenarios. Methodological and developmental topics are discussed vis-a-vis ethical considerations. Originally started in approximately 2013, this paper draws on observations and the developing concerns of the author during his ontology graduate studies. The abstract and often philosophical nature of some applied ontologies, combined with the fact that they are or can be applied to areas of human life that have a social and person effect, calls for moral and ethical awareness. Communities of interest include those of data science, ethics, information sharing, privacy, policy, etc. The below GitHub link provides proof of work and ideation at the approximate time of original development. The author seeks funding or other opportunity to complete this paper as it has been on in-progress and on-the-shelf for a number of years. (Please contact)

The goal of this paper is two-fold: first, to emphasize causality in disease ontology and knowledge representation, presenting a general and cursory discussion of causality and causal chains; and second, to clarify and develop the River Flow Model of Diseases (RFM). The RFM is an ontological account of disease, representing the causal structure of pathology. It applies general knowledge of causality using the concept of causal chains. The river analogy of disease is explained, formal descriptions are offered, and the RFM disease definition is refined by describing causal chains in terms of causal relations. The definition is updated to coincide with the actual RFM classes found in its upper-level ontology, YAMATO, which brings to light some challenges in developing both YAMATO and the RFM. The RFM is also discussed in relation to another ontological account of disease. Strategies are offered toward interoperability between these theories.

This paper presents an ontology architecture concept for the European Space Agency‘s (ESA) Space Situational Awareness (SSA) Program. It incorporates the author‘s domain ontology, The Space Situational Awareness Ontology and related ontology work. I summarize computational ontology, discuss the segments of ESA SSA, and introduce an option for a modular ontology framework reflecting the divisionsof the SSA program. Among other things, ontologies are used for data sharing and integration. By applying ontology to ESA data, the ESA may better achieve its integration and innovation goals, while simultaneously improving the state of peaceful SSA.

What are shapes? The ancient Greek geometer is perhaps the most familiar with these entities, but shape is general enough to transcend domains of inquiry. In this communication I present a broad examination of shape and related notions, such as form, boundary and surface. I aim to explore this question and describe the category of shape by identifying some of its most general features. I contrast geometric (or perfect) shapes with physical or organic shapes (the shape of objects), discuss granularity, artifactuality, the cognitive aspect of shape and introduce a preliminary ontological hierarchy of shape

In “A Defense of Presentism ”, Ned Markosian addresses the problem of singular propositions about non-present objects. The proposed solution uses a paraphrasing strategy that differentiates between two kinds of meaning in declarative sentences, and also distinguishes between two truth-conditions for singular propositions. The solution, however, is unsatisfactory. I demonstrate that the both truth-conditions suffer from the same problems in spite of the examples used to support the claim that one is a proper treatment for singular propositions. Part of the difficulty is in the limited expressivity of logical formalisms, a limitation not unique to the philosophy of time, but which calls for greater attention

The question is: should the United States and nations at large pursue a human spaceflight program (and if so, why)? I offer an unwavering positive answer to this question, and state the reasons for it while considering the broad challenges and benefits of (human) spaceflight. Space exploration is a human activity that is intrinsically forward-looking, and as such, has positive potential. Both national and international space programs can galvanize the population, inspire the youth, foster job-creation, and motivate the existing workforce. The nature of the enterprises involved—their scale, novelty, and complexity—requires a steady and continuous upward progression toward greater societal, scientific and technological development. That is, in order to overcome the challenges of human spaceflight, progress is required. More to the point, the survival of humanity depends on expanding beyond the confines of our planet. Human spaceflight, in short, presents us with an opportunity to significantly advance the nation and the global community.

An individual’s sense of self, their sense of identity, is often invaluable to their psychological wellbeing. Yet we find it all too easy to define ourselves in terms of mutable and impermanent things, such as our professional, financial, or interpersonal success. Likewise, we take our mistakes, failures, or rejections to heart, often viewing them as a reflection of our identity, our true self, or as indication of an inherent weakness, problem, superiority or innate talent. By identifying ourselves with these (and other) entities, we perform acts of misidentification. In this communication I aim to demonstrate that misidentification of the self is a cause of, or explains, a number of situations involving psychological suffering. The act of misidentification is based on false perceptions, a lack of psychological awareness, and involves harmful attachment and dependence. I explore the Buddhist perspective on identity and attachment as a psychological method to alleviating suffering. I argue that we must not identify with anything internal or external to ourselves, i.e., to no thing that is not our self. Further, I provide real-world scenarios in which this harmful identification may occur in order to demonstrate the value of these perspectives as tools to prevent suffering. In writing this paper, the intent was not to advocate Buddhist philosophy per se, but rather to explain how ideas found in Buddhism can help us understand our psychology and offer an avenue to alleviate unnecessary suffering resulting from ignorance, harmful dependence, and a mismatch between reality and falsity, rationality and irrationality.

Space situational awareness (SSA) is vital for international safety and security, and for the future of space travel. The sharing of SSA data and information should improve the state of global SSA for planetary defense and spaceflight safety. I take steps toward a Space Situational Awareness (SSA) Ontology, and outline some central objectives, requirements and desiderata in the ontology development process for this domain. The purpose of this ontological system is to explore the potential for the ontology research topic to (i) represent SSA general knowledge, data, and entities/objects, (ii) clearly express the meaning of SSA data, and (iii) foster SSA data-sharing. The overall goal and motivation is to (iv) improve our capacity for planetary defense, e.g., from near- or deep-space objects and phenomena, and (v) facilitate safer and peaceful space access, navigation and travel, by improving global SSA. This research is thereby intended only for peaceful space-domain applications and uses, with particular interests in orbital debris. There is little application of ontology to the space domain as compared with other disciplines and little if any ontological development of SSA and related domains. In this respect, this paper offers novel concepts.

The orbital debris problem presents an opportunity for inter-agency and international cooperation toward the mutually beneficial goals of debris prevention, mitigation, remediation, and improved space situational awareness (SSA). Achieving these goals requires sharing orbital debris and other SSA data. Toward this, I present an ontological architecture for the orbital debris and broader SSA domain, taking steps in the creation of an orbital debris ontology (ODO). The purpose of this ontological system is to (I) represent general orbital debris and SSA domain knowledge, (II) structure, and standardize where needed, orbital data and terminology, and (III) foster semantic interoperability and data-sharing. In doing so I hope to (IV) contribute to solving the orbital debris problem, improving peaceful global SSA, and ensuring safe space travel for future generations.

In order to understand humanity we must explore and understand our relation to the world, to God and to ourselves. This can be done, in part, by grasping the metaphors in religious texts. More specifically, the symbolism entrenched in Biblical passages and ideas are statements expressing aspects of the human being, the human condition, reality and the relation(s) among them. In this communication I explore these symbolisms following discussion of some preliminary ideas, and explain the former in terms of the latter. Moreover, morality, meaning and purpose can be derived from an understanding of these symbolisms. Morality, love, reason, wisdom, creativity, reality, God and Truth are all interrelated. They help us to grasp what the human being is. I take the stance that humanity—or self-aware willful consciousness rational agents, more generally—holds a positive and unique position in the universe. A comprehension of the general idea(s), herein, is invaluable to the human being because it presents uplifting conceptions of humanity. The individual can (should) come to see themselves rationally as a source of great positive (good) potential within their local community and humanity as a whole.

This paper develops the ontology of space objects for theoretical and computational ontology applied to the space (astronautical/astronomical) domain. It follows “An ontological architecture for Orbital Debris Data” (Rovetto, 2015) and “Preliminaries of a Space Situational Awareness Ontology” (Rovetto, Kelso, 2016). Important considerations for developing a space object ontology, or more broadly, a space domain ontology are presented. The main category term ‘Space Object’ is analyzed from a philosophical perspective. The ontological commitments of legal definitions for artificial space objects are also discussed. Space object taxonomies are offered and space object terms are defined.

This paper defends, and emphasizes the importance of, spaceflight, broadly construed to include human and unmanned spaceflight, space science, exploration and development. Within this discourse, I provide counter-replies to remarks by physicist Dr. Steven Weinberg against my previous support of human spaceflight. In this defense of peaceful spaceflight I draw upon a variety of sources. Although a focus is human spaceflight, human and unmanned modes must not be treated as an either-or opposition. Rather, each has a critical role to play in moving humanity forward as a spacefaring species. In the course of this communication, I also stress NASA’s (and other space agency’s) perennial role as a science and technology-driver, and its function to provide a stable and unified platform for space programs.

The orbital space environment is home to natural and artificial satellites, debris, and space weather phenomena. As the population of orbital objects grows so do the potential hazards to astronauts, space infrastructure and spaceflight capability. Orbital debris, in particular, is a universal concern. This and other hazards can be minimized by improving global space situational awareness (SSA). By sharing more data and increasing observational coverage of the space environment we stand to achieve that goal, thereby making spaceflight safer and expanding our knowledge of near-Earth space. To facilitate data-sharing interoperability among distinct orbital debris and space object catalogs, and SSA information systems, I proposed ontology in (Rovetto, 2015) and (Rovetto and Kelso, 2016). I continue this effort toward formal representations and models of the overall domain that may serve to improve peaceful SSA and increase our scientific knowledge. This paper explains the project concept introduced in those publications, summarizing efforts to date as well as the research field of ontology development and engineering. I describe concepts for an ontological framework for the orbital space environment, near-Earth space environment and SSA domain. An ontological framework is conceived as a part of a potential international information system. The purpose of such a system is to consolidate, analyze and reason over various sources and types of orbital and SSA data toward the mutually beneficial goals of safer space navigation and scientific research. Recent internationals findings on the limitations of orbital data, in addition to existing publications on collaborative SSA, demonstrate both the overlap with this project and the need for data-sharing and integration.

A short summary paper of my Orbital Space Domain Ontology project (purl.org/space-ontology), originally conceived in 2011. Since then I've sought (without success) opportunities to realize it (either as a PhD or other degree thesis; or in an employment position) toward my original passion of entering the space sector and gaining further space education. Since then persons in the relevant space disciplines have seen the potential in it, and unfortunately some have taken advantage of my ideas yet excluded me from work. I continue to struggle to fight for my own ideas as I see others professionally and financially benefit at my expense. References and documentation are available upon request to confirm my early ideation and origination on this topic. Please contact me if you have opportunities. Thank you.