A biological ontology is a set of computer- and human-interpretable terms and relations that logically represent entities in the biological world and how they relate to each other.
Similarly, the Tractatus did not elucidate the semantic relations between logically proper names and simple parts of states of affairs.
The two relations are logically similar in certain ways.
To get at the chief problem, first, define a property or relation to be logically simple (simple, for short) if it is not itself a negation, conjunction, disjunction, quantification, modalization, etc. of any other properties or relations.
Solely using algorithms that match through logically asserted relations would have been hampered by the structural heterogeneity (i.e. differences in where relations are applied) of the ontologies.
Some supervenience relations are metaphysically (or logically) necessary.
He accepted from Locke the principle that our knowledge is restricted to sense impressions from experience and logically necessary relations of ideas in advance of experience (in Latin, a priori).
Regarding definitions: while computer reasoning across ontologies is often accomplished through logically asserted relations, and not through text definitions, humans performing manual alignments or evaluating automated results often require some idea of a class's meaning.
Whereas the classical consequence relation preserves truth in all logically possible worlds, nonmonotonic consequence relations preserve truth in all least abnormal worlds.
Closure principles are a family of principles stating that when a proposition has some form of positive epistemic status, knowledge, say, and bears some relevant relation to some other proposition, logically entailing it, say, then that second proposition has the same epistemic status as the first.
