ground-mission-feasibility-ontology-inferred-capabilities TEC-0131 · proposedGround mission feasibility in an ontology of inferred capabi
Store vehicle components, mission types and required capabilities in an ontology with SWRL rules that infer capabilities from hardware/software, then put both the mission's required capabilities and the vehicle's inferred capabilities into
Proposed. Filed by the drafting stage because a paper introduces or tests it. Nobody has vouched for it. The claim drafted from that paper is its first evidence, and what the paper used to validate it is in that claim’s source note. Say whether it held up for you, below.
Store vehicle components, mission types and required capabilities in an ontology with SWRL rules that infer capabilities from hardware/software, then put both the mission's required capabilities and the vehicle's inferred capabilities into Filed by the drafting stage from A Cognitive Architecture for Shared Autonomy in AUV Operations (2608.29347) with status proposed: the paper introduces or tests it, and the claim drafted from the paper is its first evidence. The paper validated it by: Feasibility-verdict accuracy over 5 runs per vehicle configuration per model, compared against the same prompt with the ontology requirements removed; with requirements GPT-OSS reached 100% on all three configurations, and without them the models mislabelled the partially-possible configuration and named the wrong missing component.. Nobody has vouched for it; add support or contest it on this page.
Does it work?
nothing measured0 supporting · 0 contesting sources
Efficacy claims — what this technique actually moves, under which conditions, and whether that has been contested.
No efficacy claim filed yet. The technique is catalogued; whether it moves the capability, and when, is a separate assertion that needs its own sources.
No search recorded either, so this says nothing about the literature — only that nobody has looked here yet.
Code
No repository linked yet. Contribute one.
Sources
Whether a technique works is a claim. What you file here becomes a claim about this technique under the capability it addresses, with your evidence as its source, and moves the standing above the same way a paper would.