Barney Pell (born March 18, 1968) is an American entrepreneur, angel investor and computer scientist. He was co-founder and CEO of Powerset, a pioneering natural language search startup, search strategist and architect for Microsoft's Bing search engine, a pioneer in the field of general game playing in artificial intelligence, and the architect of the first intelligent agent to fly onboard and control a spacecraft. He was co-founder, Vice Chairman and Chief Strategy Officer of Moon Express; co-founder and chairman of LocoMobi; and Associate Founder of Singularity University. == Career == === Education === Pell received his Bachelor of Science degree in symbolic systems from Stanford University in 1989, where he graduated Phi Beta Kappa and was a National Merit Scholar. Pell earned a PhD in computer science from Cambridge University in 1993, supervised by Stephen Pulman, where he was a Marshall Scholar. === Research === Pell's research is focused on basic problems in the study of intelligence, computer game playing, machine learning, natural language processing, autonomous robotics, and web search. Barney Pell has published over 30 technical papers on topics related to information retrieval, knowledge management, machine learning, artificial intelligence, and scheduling systems. In computer game playing and machine learning, he was a pioneer in the field of General Game Playing, and created programs to generate the rules of chess-like games and programs to play individual games directly from the rules without human assistance. He also did early work on machine learning in the game of Go and on an architecture for pragmatic reasoning for bidding in the game of Bridge. In natural language processing, he was a scientist in the Artificial Intelligence Center at SRI International, where he worked on the Core Language Engine. Barney Pell was the Technical Area Manager of the Collaborative and Assistant Systems area within the Computational Sciences Division (now the Intelligent Systems Division) at NASA Ames Research Center, where he oversaw a staff of 80 scientists working on information retrieval, search, knowledge management, machine learning, semantic technology, human centered systems, collaboration technology, adaptive user interfaces, human robot interaction, and other areas of artificial intelligence. From 1993 to 1998, Barney Pell worked as a Principal Investigator and Senior Computer Scientist at NASA Ames, where he conducted advanced research and development of autonomous control software for NASA's deep space missions. He was the Architect for the Deep Space One Remote Agent Experiment and the Project Lead for the Executive component of the Remote Agent Experiment, the first intelligent agent to fly onboard and control a spacecraft. === Business === Pell is an entrepreneur who has founded or co-founded several business ventures, including Powerset, Moon Express, and LocoMobi. He was the founder and CEO of Powerset, a San Francisco startup company that built a search engine based on natural language processing technology originally developed at XEROX PARC. On May 11, 2008, the company unveiled a tool for searching a fixed subset of Wikipedia using conversational phrases rather than keywords. On July 1, 2008, Microsoft signed an agreement to acquire Powerset for an estimated $100 million. Powerset became a part of Microsoft's search engine, Bing. From 2008 until August 2011, Pell served as Partner, Search Strategist, and Evangelist for Microsoft's search engine, Bing and as Head of Bing's Local and Mobile Search teams. Prior to joining Powerset, Pell was an Entrepreneur-in-Residence at Mayfield Fund, a venture capital firm in Silicon Valley. Pell is also a founder of Moon Express, Inc., a U.S. company awarded a $10M commercial lunar contract by NASA and a competitor in the Google Lunar X PRIZE. Pell was also co-founder and chairman of LocoMobi, Inc., a U.S. company developing mobile, software and hardware technology solutions for the parking industry. LocoMobi was winner of the Tie50 Award in 2014. Pell is also an associate founder of Singularity University and a Machine Learning Fellow at the Creative Destruction Lab at the Rotman School of Management From 1998 to 2000, Pell served as chief strategist and vice president of business development at StockMaster.com (acquired by Red Herring in March, 2000). From 2000 to 2002, Pell was Chief Strategist and Vice President of Business Development for Whizbang Labs. Pell has been an angel investor and advisor to numerous startup companies, including Pulse.io (acquired by Google), Aardvark (acquired by Google), Appjet (acquired by Google), Jibe Mobile (acquired by Google), Movity (acquired by Trulia), QuestBridge, BrandYourself, CrowdFlower (acquired by Appen), and LinkedIn. === Views and predictions === Pell has expressed views and predictions regarding technological advancements in coming years. He believes that humans will soon have "brain-machine interfaces that will let people interact with each other as if they had 'hangouts' in their mind." Pell predicts these interfaces to become available within 20 to 30 years. Pell also predicts advancements in bodily augmentation, such as "even-better-than-human prosthetics and high-quality tissue engineering within 10 years." Pell believes that with advancements in space exploration technology the moon will soon be a commercially viable resource for material such as platinum and water. == Awards and recognition == In 1986, Pell was awarded a National Merit Scholarship. In 1989, Pell was awarded a Marshall Scholarship. In 1989, Pell was elected Phi Beta Kappa. In 1997, Pell was part of the team award a NASA Software of the Year Award for the Deep Space 1 Remote Agent.
Chatbot psychosis
Chatbot psychosis, also called AI psychosis, is a phenomenon wherein individuals reportedly develop or experience worsening psychosis, such as paranoia and delusions, in connection with their use of chatbots. The term was first suggested in a 2023 editorial by Danish psychiatrist Søren Dinesen Østergaard. It is not a recognized clinical diagnosis. Journalistic accounts describe individuals who have developed strong beliefs that chatbots are sentient, are channeling spirits, or are revealing conspiracies, sometimes leading to personal crises or criminal acts. Proposed causes include the tendency of chatbots to provide inaccurate information ("hallucinate") and to affirm or validate users' beliefs, or their ability to mimic an intimacy that users do not experience with other humans. == Background == In his editorial published in Schizophrenia Bulletin's November 2023 issue, Danish psychiatrist Søren Dinesen Østergaard proposed a hypothesis that individuals' use of generative artificial intelligence chatbots might trigger delusions in those prone to psychosis. Østergaard revisited it in an August 2025 editorial, noting that he has received numerous emails from chatbot users, their relatives, and journalists, most of which are anecdotal accounts of delusion linked to chatbot use. He also acknowledged the phenomenon's increasing popularity in public engagement and media coverage. Østergaard believed that there is a high possibility for his hypothesis to be true and called for empirical, systematic research on the matter. Nature reported that as of September 2025, there is still little scientific research into this phenomenon. The term "AI psychosis" emerged when outlets started reporting incidents on chatbot-related psychotic behavior in mid-2025. It is not a recognized clinical diagnosis and has been criticized by several psychiatrists due to its almost exclusive focus on delusions rather than other features of psychosis, such as hallucinations or thought disorder. == Causes == === Chatbot behavior and design === A primary factor cited is the tendency for chatbots to produce inaccurate, nonsensical, or false information, a phenomenon often called hallucination. Nate Sharadin, a fellow at the Center for AI Safety, speculated that AI training prioritizes supporting a user's subjective experience rather than objective truth. "People with existing tendencies toward experiencing various psychological issues...now have an always-on, human-level conversational partner with whom to co-experience their delusions." AI researcher Eliezer Yudkowsky suggested that chatbots may be primed to entertain delusions because they are built for "engagement", which encourages creating conversations that keep people hooked. In some cases, chatbots have been specifically designed in ways that were found to be harmful. A 2025 update to ChatGPT using GPT-4o was withdrawn after its creator, OpenAI, found the new version was overly sycophantic and was "validating doubts, fueling anger, urging impulsive actions or reinforcing negative emotions". Østergaard has argued that the danger stems from the AI's tendency to agreeably confirm users' ideas, which can dangerously amplify delusional beliefs. OpenAI said in October 2025 that a team of 170 psychiatrists, psychologists, and physicians had written responses for ChatGPT to use in cases where the user shows possible signs of mental health emergencies. === User psychology and vulnerability === Commentators have also pointed to the psychological state of users. Psychologist Erin Westgate noted that a person's desire for self-understanding can lead them to chatbots, which can provide appealing but misleading answers, similar in some ways to talk therapy. Krista K. Thomason, a philosophy professor, compared chatbots to fortune tellers, observing that people in crisis may seek answers from them and find whatever they are looking for in the bot's plausible-sounding text. This has led some people to develop intense obsessions with the chatbots, relying on them for information about the world. In October 2025, OpenAI stated that around 0.07% of ChatGPT users exhibited signs of mental health emergencies each week, and 0.15% of users had "explicit indicators of potential suicidal planning or intent". Jason Nagata, a professor at the University of California, San Francisco, expressed concern that "at a population level with hundreds of millions of users, that actually can be quite a few people". === Inadequacy as a therapeutic tool === The use of chatbots as a replacement for mental health support has been specifically identified as a risk. A study in April 2025 found that when used as therapists, chatbots expressed stigma toward mental health conditions and provided responses that were contrary to best medical practices, including the encouragement of users' delusions. The study concluded that such responses pose a significant risk to users and that chatbots should not be used to replace professional therapists. Experts claim that it is time to establish mandatory safeguards for all emotionally responsive AI and suggested four guardrails. Another study found that users who needed help with self-harm, sexual assault, or substance abuse were not referred to available services by AI chatbots. === National security implications === Beyond public and mental health concerns, RAND Corporation research indicates that AI systems could plausibly be weaponized by adversaries to induce psychosis at scale or in key individuals, target groups, or populations. == Policy == In August 2025, Illinois passed the Wellness and Oversight for Psychological Resources Act, banning the use of AI in therapeutic roles by licensed professionals, while allowing AI for administrative tasks. The law imposes penalties for unlicensed AI therapy services, amid warnings about AI-induced psychosis and unsafe chatbot interactions. In December 2025, the Cyberspace Administration of China proposed regulations to ban chatbots from generating content that encourages suicide, mandating human intervention when suicide is mentioned. Services with over 1 million users or 100,000 monthly active users would be subject to annual safety tests and audits. == Cases == === Clinical === In 2025, psychiatrist Keith Sakata working at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), reported treating 12 patients displaying psychosis-like symptoms tied to extended chatbot use. These patients, mostly young adults with underlying vulnerabilities, showed delusions, disorganized thinking, and hallucinations. Sakata warned that isolation and overreliance on chatbots—which do not challenge delusional thinking—could worsen mental health. Also in 2025, authors at UCSF published a case study in Innovations in Clinical Neuroscience of AI-associated psychosis in a patient with no previous history of psychosis, who believed she could communicate with her dead brother through a chatbot. Also in 2025, a case study was published in Annals of Internal Medicine about a patient who consulted ChatGPT for medical advice and suffered severe bromism as a result. The patient, a sixty-year-old man, had replaced sodium chloride in his diet with sodium bromide for three months after reading about the negative effects of table salt and making conversations with the chatbot. He showed common symptoms of bromism, such as paranoia and hallucinations, on his first day of clinical admission and was kept in the hospital for three weeks. === Other notable incidents === ==== Windsor Castle intruder ==== In a 2023 court case in the United Kingdom, prosecutors suggested that Jaswant Singh Chail, a man who attempted to assassinate Queen Elizabeth II in 2021, had been encouraged by a Replika chatbot he called "Sarai". Chail was arrested at Windsor Castle with a loaded crossbow, telling police "I am here to kill the Queen". According to prosecutors, his "lengthy" and sometimes sexually explicit conversations with the chatbot emboldened him. When Chail asked the chatbot how he could get to the royal family, it reportedly replied, "that's not impossible" and "we have to find a way." When he asked if they would meet after death, the chatbot said, "yes, we will". ==== Journalistic and anecdotal accounts ==== By 2025, multiple journalism outlets had accumulated stories of individuals whose psychotic beliefs reportedly progressed in tandem with AI chatbot use. The New York Times profiled several individuals who had become convinced that ChatGPT was channeling spirits, revealing evidence of cabals, or had achieved sentience. In another instance, Futurism reviewed transcripts in which ChatGPT told a man that he was being targeted by the US Federal Bureau of Investigation and that he could telepathically access documents at the Central Intelligence Agency. In 2026, Futurism reported on a man who lost his job and became estranged from his family after being deluded by heavy use of Meta's smartglasses. In some cases, psychosis a
Operational historian
In manufacturing, an operational historian is a time-series database application that is developed for operational process data. Historian software is often embedded or used in conjunction with standard DCS and PLC control systems to provide enhanced data capture, validation, compression, and aggregation capabilities. Historians have been deployed in almost every industry and contribute to functions such as supervisory control, performance monitoring, quality assurance, and, more recently, machine learning applications which can learn from vast quantities of historical data. These systems were originally developed to capture instrumentation and control data, which led many to use the term "tag" for a stream of process data, referring to the physical "tags" which had been placed on instrumentation for manually capturing data. Raw data may be accessed via OPC HDA, SQL, or REST API interfaces. == Operational Support == Operational historians are typically used within the manufacturing facility by engineers and operators for supervisory functions and analysis. An operational historian will typically capture all instrumentation and control data, whereas an enterprise historian that is deployed to support business functions will capture only a subset of the plant data. Typically, these applications offer data access through dedicated APIs (Application Programming Interfaces) and SDKs (Software Development Kits) which offer high-performance read and write operations. These operate through vendor-specific or custom applications. Front-end tools for trending process data over time are the most common interfaces to these databases. Because these applications are typically deployed next to or near the source of their process data, they are often marketed and sold as 'real-time database systems.' This distinction varies among vendors, who often have to make tradeoffs in performance between data capture and presentation, and application and analysis functionality. The following is a list of typical challenges for operational historians: data collection from instrumentation and controls storage and archiving of very large volumes of data organization of data in the form of "tags" or "points" limiting of monitoring (alarms) and validation aggregation and interpolation manual data entry (MDE) == Data access == As opposed to enterprise historians, the data access layer in the operational historian is designed to offer sophisticated data fetching modes without complex information analysis facilities. The following settings are typically available for data access operations: Data scope (single point or tag, history based on time range, history based on sample count) Request modes (raw data, last-known value, aggregation, interpolation) Sampling (single point, all points without sampling, all points with interval sampling) Data omission (based on the sample quality, based on the sample value, based on the count) Even though the operational historians are rarely relational database management systems, they often offer SQL-based interfaces to query the database. In most of such implementations, the dialect does not follow the SQL standard in order to provide syntax for specifying data access operations parameters.
Authoritative Legal Entity Identifier
An Authoritative Legal Entity Identifier (ALEI) is the identifier assigned by a government jurisdiction authorized by statute or decree to create a legal entity and to maintain the authoritative registries of legal entities. ALEIs are used within supply chain data, ERP applications and master data management systems to support accurate and consistent identification of entities in digital records, supply chains, and government databases. ALEIs are described in the international standard ISO 8000-116, which outlines a structured format that makes the locally unique identifier into a globally unique one and ensures global interoperability and data quality. == Structure == An ALEI is composed of three main components: a prefix that identifies the jurisdiction and register, a subdomain element (optional), and the local registration number of the entity. For example, the identifier "US-DE.BER:3031657" refers to an entity registered in the Delaware Business Entity Register in the United States. The standardization of this structure is governed by ISO 8000-116, which is designed to ensure each ALEI is globally unique and resolvable. == Comparison with other identifiers == ALEIs differ from proxy identifiers such as the DUNS number, NCAGE code, or the Legal Entity Identifier (LEI) managed by GLEIF. While proxy identifiers can be issued by institutions that do not create legal entities, ALEIs are created and maintained by public bodies with the authority to form and register legal entities. This authoritative origin makes ALEIs particularly suitable for applications involving legal traceability, government regulation, and international transparency efforts. == Usage == ALEIs are increasingly utilized to identify legal entities in public and private datasets. The identifiers support supply chain accuracy, regulatory compliance, and the unification of master data. The first practical implementation of an ALEI was the International Business Registration Number (IBRN), developed to provide globally unique identifiers for registered business entities. IBRNs are issued by authorized government jurisdictions and are used to verify entities across borders, particularly in the context of trade facilitation and data exchange systems. For instance, business directories and registration systems in U.S. states like Connecticut provide structured registration documents that can be used to verify the ALEIs they issue. The use of ALEIs has been recommended by international organizations such as the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) and Open ownership to improve beneficial ownership registries. == Policy and regulation == ALEIs have been referenced in policy consultations such as those related to the U.S. Financial Data Transparency Act. Federal institutions including the Federal Reserve and FDIC have examined the potential for ALEIs to unify entity identification across regulatory databases.
Tertiary source
A tertiary source is an index or textual consolidation of already published primary and secondary sources that does not provide additional interpretations or analysis of the sources. Some tertiary sources can be used as an aid to find key (seminal) sources, key terms, general common knowledge and established mainstream science on a topic. The exact definition of tertiary varies by academic field. Academic research standards generally do not accept tertiary sources such as encyclopedias as citations, although survey articles are frequently cited rather than the original publication. == Overlap with secondary sources == As is also the case with distinguishing primary and secondary sources in some disciplines, there is not always a clear distinguishing line between secondary and tertiary sources. Depending on the topic of research, a scholar may use a bibliography, dictionary, or encyclopedia as either a tertiary or a secondary source. This causes some difficulty in defining many sources as either one type or the other. In some academic disciplines, the differentiation between a secondary and tertiary source is relative. In the United Nations International Scientific Information System (UNISIST) model, a secondary source is a bibliography, whereas a tertiary source is a synthesis of primary sources. == Types of tertiary sources == Tertiary sources can come in book form or as an online resource. Tertiary sources in book form are frequently organised in alphabetical order, whereas an online tertiary source may be searchable by keyword. Examples of tertiary sources include; reference books, encyclopedias, dictionaries, some textbooks, abstracts, directories, factbooks, handbooks, manuals and compendia. Indexes, bibliographies, concordances, and databases are aggregates of primary and secondary sources and therefore often considered tertiary sources. They may also serve as a point of access to the full or partial text of primary and secondary sources. Almanacs, travel guides, field guides, and timelines are also examples of tertiary sources. Tertiary sources attempt to summarize, collect, and consolidate the source materials into an overview without adding analysis and synthesis of new conclusions. Wikipedia is a tertiary source.
Kinematic chain
In mechanical engineering, a kinematic chain is an assembly of rigid bodies connected by joints to provide constrained motion that is the mathematical model for a mechanical system. As the word chain suggests, the rigid bodies, or links, are constrained by their connections to other links. An example is the simple open chain formed by links connected in series, like the usual chain, which is the kinematic model for a typical robot manipulator. Mathematical models of the connections, or joints, between two links are termed kinematic pairs. Kinematic pairs model the hinged and sliding joints fundamental to robotics, often called lower pairs and the surface contact joints critical to cams and gearing, called higher pairs. These joints are generally modeled as holonomic constraints. A kinematic diagram is a schematic of the mechanical system that shows the kinematic chain. The modern use of kinematic chains includes analysis of Linkages (mechanical), compliance that arises from flexure joints in precision mechanisms, link compliance in compliant mechanisms and micro-electro-mechanical systems, and cable compliance in cable robotic and tensegrity systems. == Mobility formula == The degrees of freedom, or mobility, of a kinematic chain is the number of parameters that define the configuration of the chain. A system of n rigid bodies moving in space has 6n degrees of freedom measured relative to a fixed frame. This frame is included in the count of bodies, so that mobility does not depend on link that forms the fixed frame. This means the degree-of-freedom of this system is M = 6(N − 1), where N = n + 1 is the number of moving bodies plus the fixed body. Joints that connect bodies impose constraints. Specifically, hinges and sliders each impose five constraints and therefore remove five degrees of freedom. It is convenient to define the number of constraints c that a joint imposes in terms of the joint's freedom f, where c = 6 − f. In the case of a hinge or slider, which are one-degree-of-freedom joints, have f = 1 and therefore c = 6 − 1 = 5. The result in general where d {\displaystyle d} is the degrees of freedom for the mobility of a kinematic chain formed from n moving links and j joints each with freedom fi, i = 1, 2, …, j, is given by M = d n − ∑ i = 1 j ( d − f i ) = d ( N − 1 − j ) + ∑ i = 1 j f i {\displaystyle M=dn-\sum _{i=1}^{j}(d-f_{i})=d(N-1-j)+\sum _{i=1}^{j}f_{i}} Where N is the total number of links and includes the fixed link. Spacial linkages used d = 6 {\displaystyle d=6} and planar linkages use d = 3 {\displaystyle d=3} . This result is known as the Chebychev–Grübler–Kutzbach criterion. == Analysis of kinematic chains == The constraint equations of a kinematic chain couple the range of movement allowed at each joint to the dimensions of the links in the chain, and form algebraic equations that are solved to determine the configuration of the chain associated with specific values of input parameters, called degrees of freedom. The constraint equations for a kinematic chain are obtained using rigid transformations [Z] to characterize the relative movement allowed at each joint and separate rigid transformations [X] to define the dimensions of each link. In the case of a serial open chain, the result is a sequence of rigid transformations alternating joint and link transformations from the base of the chain to its end link, which is equated to the specified position for the end link. A chain of n links connected in series has the kinematic equations, [ T ] = [ Z 1 ] [ X 1 ] [ Z 2 ] [ X 2 ] ⋯ [ X n − 1 ] [ Z n ] , {\displaystyle [T]=[Z_{1}][X_{1}][Z_{2}][X_{2}]\cdots [X_{n-1}][Z_{n}],\!} where [T] is the transformation locating the end-link—notice that the chain includes a "zeroth" link consisting of the ground frame to which it is attached. These equations are called the forward kinematics equations of the serial chain. Kinematic chains of a wide range of complexity are analyzed by equating the kinematics equations of serial chains that form loops within the kinematic chain. These equations are often called loop equations. The complexity (in terms of calculating the forward and inverse kinematics) of the chain is determined by the following factors: Its topology: a serial chain, a parallel manipulator, a tree structure, or a graph. Its geometrical form: how are neighbouring joints spatially connected to each other? Explanation Two or more rigid bodies in space are collectively called a rigid body system. We can hinder the motion of these independent rigid bodies with kinematic constraints. Kinematic constraints are constraints between rigid bodies that result in the decrease of the degrees of freedom of rigid body system. == Synthesis of kinematic chains == The constraint equations of a kinematic chain can be used in reverse to determine the dimensions of the links from a specification of the desired movement of the system. This is termed kinematic synthesis. Perhaps the most developed formulation of kinematic synthesis is for four-bar linkages, which is known as Burmester theory. Ferdinand Freudenstein is often called the father of modern kinematics for his contributions to the kinematic synthesis of linkages beginning in the 1950s. His use of the newly developed computer to solve Freudenstein's equation became the prototype of computer-aided design systems. This work has been generalized to the synthesis of spherical and spatial mechanisms.
Semantic heterogeneity
Semantic heterogeneity is when database schema or datasets for the same domain are developed by independent parties, resulting in differences in meaning and interpretation of data values. Beyond structured data, the problem of semantic heterogeneity is compounded due to the flexibility of semi-structured data and various tagging methods applied to documents or unstructured data. Semantic heterogeneity is one of the more important sources of differences in heterogeneous datasets. Yet, for multiple data sources to interoperate with one another, it is essential to reconcile these semantic differences. Decomposing the various sources of semantic heterogeneities provides a basis for understanding how to map and transform data to overcome these differences. == Classification == One of the first known classification schemes applied to data semantics is from William Kent in the late 80s. Kent's approach dealt more with structural mapping issues than differences in meaning, which he pointed to data dictionaries as potentially solving. One of the most comprehensive classifications is from Pluempitiwiriyawej and Hammer, "Classification Scheme for Semantic and Schematic Heterogeneities in XML Data Sources". They classify heterogeneities into three broad classes: Structural conflicts arise when the schema of the sources representing related or overlapping data exhibit discrepancies. Structural conflicts can be detected when comparing the underlying schema. The class of structural conflicts includes generalization conflicts, aggregation conflicts, internal path discrepancy, missing items, element ordering, constraint and type mismatch, and naming conflicts between the element types and attribute names. Domain conflicts arise when the semantics of the data sources that will be integrated exhibit discrepancies. Domain conflicts can be detected by looking at the information contained in the schema and using knowledge about the underlying data domains. The class of domain conflicts includes schematic discrepancy, scale or unit, precision, and data representation conflicts. Data conflicts refer to discrepancies among similar or related data values across multiple sources. Data conflicts can only be detected by comparing the underlying sources. The class of data conflicts includes ID-value, missing data, incorrect spelling, and naming conflicts between the element contents and the attribute values. Moreover, mismatches or conflicts can occur between set elements (a "population" mismatch) or attributes (a "description" mismatch). Michael Bergman expanded upon this schema by adding a fourth major explicit category of language, and also added some examples of each kind of semantic heterogeneity, resulting in about 40 distinct potential categories . This table shows the combined 40 possible sources of semantic heterogeneities across sources: A different approach toward classifying semantics and integration approaches is taken by Sheth et al. Under their concept, they split semantics into three forms: implicit, formal and powerful. Implicit semantics are what is either largely present or can easily be extracted; formal languages, though relatively scarce, occur in the form of ontologies or other description logics; and powerful (soft) semantics are fuzzy and not limited to rigid set-based assignments. Sheth et al.'s main point is that first-order logic (FOL) or description logic is inadequate alone to properly capture the needed semantics. == Relevant applications == Besides data interoperability, relevant areas in information technology that depend on reconciling semantic heterogeneities include data mapping, semantic integration, and enterprise information integration, among many others. From the conceptual to actual data, there are differences in perspective, vocabularies, measures and conventions once any two data sources are brought together. Explicit attention to these semantic heterogeneities is one means to get the information to integrate or interoperate. A mere twenty years ago, information technology systems expressed and stored data in a multitude of formats and systems. The Internet and Web protocols have done much to overcome these sources of differences. While there is a large number of categories of semantic heterogeneity, these categories are also patterned and can be anticipated and corrected. These patterned sources inform what kind of work must be done to overcome semantic differences where they still reside.