Give an example of how the disjoint rule applies in a supertype/subtype connection.

If the issue set consists entirely of nominal characteristics, vector space-based classification algorithms are usually not the best option. Let me know what you think about this assertion. How would you apply ML to the task of categorizing nominal data?

3,

Vector space classification methods frequently fail when applied to problem sets with nominal feature sets alone. What do you think of the statement? Using ML, how would you classify nominal data? Answer each of the above queries in detail.

Find out how and when to use supertype/subtype connections in your data models.

Can the interface of one of the views be entirely altered without affecting the Model, taking into mind the propagation mechanism and the Model-View-Controller architecture? Break down your decision.

Determine which constructs of RDFS and OWL can be expressed using monotonic rules. For example, the subclass relation is represented as c(X)→c0(X) (c0 is a subclass of c0).

Is it possible, considering the propagation approach, to completely change the look of one view in the Model-View-Controller hierarchy without impacting the Model? Justify your stance.

Draw these on the given diagram: Associations (aggregations/compositions if needed) with names and multiplicities, generalization, attributes (withvisibility and attribute types).

Is it possible to completely switch the interface of one of the views inside the Model-View-Controller framework without modifying the Model, taking into consideration the propagation mechanism in particular? Please defend your position.