Part 2 In a hypothetical semester, a student's attempt at Assignment 2 included the class relationship shown at the left in the attached file. It

Part 2

In a hypothetical semester, a student's attempt at Assignment 2 included the class relationship shown at the left in the attached file. It seems to me that I am an individual, not a class, so the diagram appears clearly mistaken. I consulted the student's comments for a justification of this modeling choice, but found none. I therefore concluded that this student misunderstands the difference between instances and subclasses.

To the right of the student's diagram is my example of an accurate model. For this part of Assignment 4 I want you to translate the information in my UML and RDF diagrams into a set-theoretic explanation, using the terminology, notation, and symbols from the Partee reading on set theory.

Recall from our presentation that a set can be understood as the extension of a class, but that classes are not identical with their set extensions. For example, the set {3, 5, 7} is the extension of more than one distinct class, since its elements have more than one property in common.

For the last part of this assignment, take the side of the hypothetical student whose diagram I marked incorrect. Convince me that Professor Dubin truly is a subclass of person, and not an individual instance of that class. Write the justification that your hypothetical colleague neglected to incude. This explanation must be plausible enough to persuade any reasonable person. Include a set-theoretic explanation, using the terminology, notation, and symbols from the Partee reading on set theory.