The Knowledge Representation Requirements Model

Laszlo's Pyramid of Meaning is certainly an interesting way to view the presentation of meaning. It is an upside down triangle, with the narrowest point being "data", which then ascends through "information", "knowledge", and on up through "comprehension", "understanding", "wisdom", and finally "enlightenment". It looks like this (sort of)...

. . . . . enlightenment . . . . . .
. . . . . . wisdom. . . . . . .
. . . understanding . . . .
. . . comprehension . .
. . . knowledge . .
. information .
. . data. .

The objection that I have to the Laszlo pyramid, for my work at least, is that it seems to blur knowledge representation (for automata) at the lower levels, and then knowledge, epistemology, mereology, and a bunch of natural language concepts at the upper levels.

Because of this, I think that my own Knowledge Representation Requirements Model will serve as a better benchmark for what I want to show. It is more in line with the ontological representation method I am proposing, and also in line with the Levels of Conceptual Interoperability Model.

The lowest level of the KRRM is data. Data with semantic identification becomes information. Information in context becomes knowledge. Knowledge in a time-senstive context becomes awareness. Awareness subject to comprehending context changes becomes understanding.

Understanding
Awareness
Knowledge
Information
Data

More later...

Tags: enlightenment, wisdom, understanding, comprehension, knowledge, information, data, knowledge representation