Semantic Knowledge Technologies: what the Semantic Web lost sight of, and what it never had

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2609.14121v1
• Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2026 19:55:46 GMT
• Title: Semantic Knowledge Technologies: what the Semantic Web lost sight of, and what it never had
• Abstract summary: The Semantic Web set out to give information a machine-interpretable form so that software could integrate and reason over it.<n>Its standards became scientific knowledge infrastructure, but the machine competence it promised did not follow.<n>This paper argues the original goal was right and the technical programme incomplete.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: The Semantic Web set out to give information a machine-interpretable form so that software could integrate and reason over it. Its standards became scientific knowledge infrastructure, but the machine competence it promised did not follow, and the systems now answering questions over scientific knowledge are language models holding no inspectable account of what they know. This paper argues the original goal was right and the technical programme incomplete, states what is missing, and names the extended programme Semantic Knowledge Technologies: the same technical core carried out of its web-publishing origin and applied to knowledge wherever held. The diagnosis is that the standards formalised truth while omitting three things: the conditions under which a claim holds, the operations its terms permit, and any account of what a base covers. Without conditions, contradiction and applicability cannot be judged; without operational grounding, holding a statement confers no ability; without declared coverage, a system cannot recognise the boundary of its own content, which under the open-world assumption cannot be inferred. The paper fixes the word understanding to five measurable tests (check, connect, derive, act, delimit) and sets out a seven-layer architecture in which the first three layers are enabling and the rest the cognitive capabilities they make possible. It then defines three terms the programme implies: Large Knowledge Model, a model whose unit of output is a reference to an addressable claim, not a token; SLKM, the knowledge base an agent builds for itself from declared sources; and Semantic Artificial General Intelligence, stated as a falsifiable position about necessary conditions, not a system. A graded ladder replaces the untestable word general. It is offered as a research agenda, with its weakest points and refutation condition named.

Related papers

• Constitutive Priors for Machine Intelligence: A Legitimacy Theory of the Artificial Physical World [6.102551417081661]
  Machine intelligence has conquered the symbolic world but stalled at the physical one.<n>Our thesis: the deadlock is real but unevenly distributed, and the exception has a name: the artificial physical world.<n> Buildings, industrial facilities, and infrastructure are intentionally constituted and documented.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-15T09:50:19Z)
• What General Intelligence Requires: Non-Reducible Constraints Across Levels of Description [0.0]
  General intelligence, of the kind that underwrites the full range of human cognitive achievement, is not a property of computational architecture alone.<n>This paper advances a single thesis: the structural constraints on general intelligence occupy distinct levels of description and are mutually non-reducible.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-21T10:24:57Z)
• Ceci n'est pas une pipe: AI systems as semantic abstractions [0.0]
  An AI system's output is not the fact or world state it appears to describe, but rather an engineered representation.<n>We propose a semantic framework to describe AI systems, to be able to examine the correctness of such representations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-10T15:05:28Z)
• The Substrate Collapse: AI Code Generation Invalidates Authorship-Based Knowledge Metrics [0.0]
  Software engineering has long inferred where a system's knowledge resides from who authored its code.<n>This paper argues that AI code generation severs that inference at its root.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-18T19:17:24Z)
• From Specification to Architecture: A Theory Compiler for Knowledge-Guided Machine Learning [6.365277569082624]
  Theory-guided machine learning has demonstrated that including authentic domain knowledge directly into model design improves performance.<n>Yet the process by which a formal domain theory is translated into architectural constraints remains entirely manual.<n>We propose the Theory Compiler: a system that accepts a typed, machine-readable domain theory as input and automatically produces an architecture.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-15T13:15:31Z)
• SciIF: Benchmarking Scientific Instruction Following Towards Rigorous Scientific Intelligence [60.202862987441684]
  We introduce scientific instruction following: the capability to solve problems while strictly adhering to the constraints that establish scientific validity.<n>Specifically, we introduce SciIF, a multi-discipline benchmark that evaluates this capability by pairing university-level problems with a fixed catalog of constraints.<n>By measuring both solution correctness and multi-constraint adherence, SciIF enables finegrained diagnosis of compositional reasoning failures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-01-08T09:45:58Z)
• The Open Syndrome Definition [61.0983330391914]
  We propose the first open, machine-readable format for representing case and syndrome definitions.<n>We introduce the first comprehensive dataset of standardized case definitions and tools to convert existing human-readable definitions into machine-readable formats.<n>The Open Syndrome Definition format enables consistent, scalable use of case definitions across systems, unlocking AI's potential to strengthen public health preparedness and response.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-29T19:41:54Z)
• Understanding the Dilemma of Unlearning for Large Language Models [50.54260066313032]
  Unlearning seeks to remove specific knowledge from large language models (LLMs)<n>We propose unPact, an interpretable framework for unlearning via prompt attribution and contribution tracking.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-29T12:15:19Z)
• What Really is Commonsense Knowledge? [58.5342212738895]
  We survey existing definitions of commonsense knowledge, ground into the three frameworks for defining concepts, and consolidate them into a unified definition of commonsense knowledge. We then use the consolidated definition for annotations and experiments on the CommonsenseQA and CommonsenseQA 2.0 datasets. Our study shows that there exists a large portion of non-commonsense-knowledge instances in the two datasets, and a large performance gap on these two subsets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-11-06T14:54:19Z)
• Towards Verifiable Generation: A Benchmark for Knowledge-aware Language Model Attribution [48.86322922826514]
  This paper defines a new task of Knowledge-aware Language Model Attribution (KaLMA) First, we extend attribution source from unstructured texts to Knowledge Graph (KG), whose rich structures benefit both the attribution performance and working scenarios. Second, we propose a new Conscious Incompetence" setting considering the incomplete knowledge repository. Third, we propose a comprehensive automatic evaluation metric encompassing text quality, citation quality, and text citation alignment.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-09T11:45:59Z)
• Knowledge Crosswords: Geometric Knowledge Reasoning with Large Language Models [49.23348672822087]
  We propose Knowledge Crosswords, a benchmark consisting of incomplete knowledge networks bounded by structured factual constraints. The novel setting of geometric knowledge reasoning necessitates new LM abilities beyond existing atomic/linear multi-hop QA. We conduct extensive experiments to evaluate existing LLMs and approaches on Knowledge Crosswords.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-02T15:43:53Z)
• Provable Limitations of Acquiring Meaning from Ungrounded Form: What will Future Language Models Understand? [87.20342701232869]
  We investigate the abilities of ungrounded systems to acquire meaning. We study whether assertions enable a system to emulate representations preserving semantic relations like equivalence. We find that assertions enable semantic emulation if all expressions in the language are referentially transparent. However, if the language uses non-transparent patterns like variable binding, we show that emulation can become an uncomputable problem.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-22T01:00:17Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.