I think in the past on your abstraction you probably lost a decent amount of time from not properly tracking the distinction between (what I call) objects and concepts. I think you likely at least mostly recovered from this, but in case you’re not completely sure you’ve fully done so you might want to check out the linked section. (I think it makes sense to start by understanding how we (learn to) model objects and only look at concepts later, since minds first learn to model objects and later carve up concepts as generalizations over similarity clusters of objects.)
Tbc, there’s other important stuff than objects and concepts, like relations and attributes. I currently find my ontology here useful for separating subproblems, so if you’re interested you might read more of the linked post even though you’re surely already familiar with knowledge representation (if you haven’t done so yet), but maybe you already track all that.
Thx.
Yep there are many trade-offs between criteria.
Btw, totally unrelatedly:
I think in the past on your abstraction you probably lost a decent amount of time from not properly tracking the distinction between (what I call) objects and concepts. I think you likely at least mostly recovered from this, but in case you’re not completely sure you’ve fully done so you might want to check out the linked section. (I think it makes sense to start by understanding how we (learn to) model objects and only look at concepts later, since minds first learn to model objects and later carve up concepts as generalizations over similarity clusters of objects.)
Tbc, there’s other important stuff than objects and concepts, like relations and attributes. I currently find my ontology here useful for separating subproblems, so if you’re interested you might read more of the linked post even though you’re surely already familiar with knowledge representation (if you haven’t done so yet), but maybe you already track all that.