deletions | additions       diff --git a/section_Future_Potential_In_the__.tex b/section_Future_Potential_In_the__.tex  index 6b004dc..c32b643 100644  --- a/section_Future_Potential_In_the__.tex  +++ b/section_Future_Potential_In_the__.tex 
...
\section{Future Potential}  In the literature knowledge graphs are not (usually) distinguished from ``bare statement'' graphs, in that they do not encode or publish the epistemology \footnote{Epistemology defines why something is known} of knowledge asserted in the graph.  We see this as troubling because it does not privilege {\em privilege}  knowledge: in most existing knowledge graphs supported and unsupported assertions are given equal weight. Moving forward, there is an opportunity to leverage existing vocabularies, including the Provenance Ontology (PROV-O) \cite{Moreau_2015}, and the Nanopublications Framework \cite{groth2010anatomy}, to improve the clarity and utility of knowledge graphs.  A nanopublication is a set of RDF graphs: an \em{assertion {\em assertion  graph} (the knowledge), a \em{provenance {\em provenance  graph} (the justification), and an \em{attribution {\em attribution  graph} (the believer). While justified true belief is not sufficient for knowledge, most other proposals, including a causal linkage between the justification, assertion, and believer, are well-supported within provenance vocabularies.  Added to a knowledge graph, the provenance graph can expand to provide room for whatever epistemic criteria is desired.