Inconsistencies, Negations and Changes in Ontologies Zhisheng Huang Vrije University Amsterdam The Netherlands Collaborative work with Giorgos Flouris.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Charting the Potential of Description Logic for the Generation of Referring Expression SELLC, Guangzhou, Dec Yuan Ren, Kees van Deemter and Jeff.
Advertisements

Knowledge Representation and Reasoning using Description Logic Presenter Shamima Mithun.
OWL - DL. DL System A knowledge base (KB) comprises two components, the TBox and the ABox The TBox introduces the terminology, i.e., the vocabulary of.
Query Answering for OWL-DL with Rules Boris Motik Ulrike Sattler Rudi Studer.
An Introduction to Description Logics
D. Calvanese, E. Kharlamov, W. Nutt, and D. Zheleznyakov KRDB Research Centre Free University of Bozen-Bolzano FBK, January 2011 Understanding Evolution.
D. Calvanese, E. Kharlamov, W. Nutt, and D. Zheleznyakov Free University of Bozen-Bolzano ISWC, Shanghai November, 2010 Evolution of DL-Lite Knowledge.
Evolution in OWL 2 QL & OWL 2 EL Ontologies Dmitriy Zheleznyakov 28 th of January, 2014, Oslo.
IJCAI Reasoning with Inconsistent Ontologies Zhisheng Huang, Frank van Harmelen, and Annette ten Teije Vrije University Amsterdam.
PR-OWL: A Framework for Probabilistic Ontologies by Paulo C. G. COSTA, Kathryn B. LASKEY George Mason University presented by Thomas Packer 1PR-OWL.
December 1, 2006 Florencehttp:// 1 Dynamic Aspects of SEKT Legal Ontologies Zhisheng Huang, Stefan Schlobach, Frank van Harmelen Vrije.
China05 1 Reasoning with Inconsistent Ontologies 非协调本体的推理 Zhisheng Huang, Frank van Harmelen, and Annette ten Teije Vrije.
ISWC2005http://sekt.semanticweb.org/ Reasoning with Multi-version Ontologies: a temporal logic approach Zhisheng Huang and Heiner Stuckenschmidt Vrije.
http://sekt.semanticweb.org/ WP3.4 Reasoning with Inconsistency Milestone 3.4 D3.4.3: Reasoning with Inconsistency (version 2). P/PU/Month 36.
I.1 ii.2 iii.3 iv.4 1+1=. i.1 ii.2 iii.3 iv.4 1+1=
I.1 ii.2 iii.3 iv.4 1+1=. i.1 ii.2 iii.3 iv.4 1+1=
China.2005http://sekt.semanticweb.org/ Reasoning with Multi-version Ontologies: a temporal logic approach Zhisheng Huang and Heiner Stuckenschmidt Vrije.
Basics of Reasoning in Description Logics
Belief Revision Lecture 1: AGM April 1, 2004 Gregory Wheeler
FiRE Fuzzy Reasoning Engine Nikolaos Simou National Technical University of Athens.
1 Where do spatial context-models end and where do ontologies start? A proposal of a combined approach Christian Becker Distributed Systems Daniela Nicklas.
LDK R Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation Description Logics as query language.
TAPP-09 23/02/2009Giorgos Flouris1 On Explicit Provenance Management in RDF/S Graphs Institute of Computer Science Foundation for Research and Technology.
Role of the Computer System Current Proposed Ontology Evolution Using Belief Change and the AGM Theory Giorgos Flouris, Dimitris Plexousakis, Grigoris.
Reasoning the FMA Ontologies with TrOWL Jeff Z. Pan, Yuan Ren, Nophadol Jekjantuk, and Jhonatan Garcia University of Aberdeen, UK ORE2013.
An Introduction to Description Logics. What Are Description Logics? A family of logic based Knowledge Representation formalisms –Descendants of semantic.
Applying Belief Change to Ontology Evolution PhD Student Computer Science Department University of Crete Giorgos Flouris Research Assistant.
Tableau Algorithm.
Computing & Information Sciences Kansas State University Wednesday, 08 Oct 2008CIS 530 / 730: Artificial Intelligence Lecture 17 of 42 Wednesday, 08 October.
Ming Fang 6/12/2009. Outlines  Classical logics  Introduction to DL  Syntax of DL  Semantics of DL  KR in DL  Reasoning in DL  Applications.
LDK R Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation ClassL (part 3): Reasoning with an ABox 1.
Presented by:- Somya Gupta( ) Akshat Malu ( ) Swapnil Ghuge ( ) Franz Baader, Ian Horrocks, and Ulrike Sattler.
DRAGO: Distributed Reasoning Architecture for the Semantic Web Andrei Tamilin and Luciano Serafini Work is supported by 1 June 2005 Second European Semantic.
An Introduction to Description Logics (chapter 2 of DLHB)
Semantic web course – Computer Engineering Department – Sharif Univ. of Technology – Fall Description Logics: Logic foundation of Semantic Web Semantic.
Updating ABoxes in DL-Lite D. Calvanese, E. Kharlamov, W. Nutt, D. Zheleznyakov Free University of Bozen-Bolzano AMW 2010, May 2010.
LDK R Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation Description Logics (ALC)
I. Science is not A collection of never-changing facts or beliefs about the world.
More on Description Logic(s) Frederick Maier. Note Added 10/27/03 So, there are a few errors that will be obvious to some: So, there are a few errors.
Using Fuzzy DLs to Enhance Semantic Image Analysis S. Dasiopoulou, I. Kompatsiaris, M.G.Strintzis 3 rd International Conference on Semantic and Digital.
DL Overview Second Pass Ming Fang 06/19/2009. Outlines  Description Languages  Knowledge Representation in DL  Logical Inference in DL.
LDK R Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation ClassL (Propositional Description Logic with Individuals) 1.
LDK R Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation ClassL (part 2): Reasoning with a TBox 1.
References [1] D:\My Documents\SemanticWebWorkshop\kaynak\Ian Horrocks - CS646\intro-2004.pptD:\My Documents\SemanticWebWorkshop\kaynak\Ian Horrocks -
ece 627 intelligent web: ontology and beyond
5. Semantics of Web Services XML, Google: The syntactic web Web Services and WSDL Classical procedure invocation based on: Procedure names Parameter types.
Knowledge Repn. & Reasoning Lec #11+13: Frame Systems and Description Logics UIUC CS 498: Section EA Professor: Eyal Amir Fall Semester 2004.
Charting the Potential of Description Logic for the Generation of Referring Expression SELLC, Guangzhou, Dec Yuan Ren, Kees van Deemter and Jeff.
Knowledge Representation and Reasoning University "Politehnica" of Bucharest Department of Computer Science Fall 2011 Adina Magda Florea
Of 29 lecture 15: description logic - introduction.
LDK R Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation Description Logics: family of languages.
Distributed Instance Retrieval over Heterogeneous Ontologies Andrei Tamilin (1,2) & Luciano Serafini (1) (1) ITC-IRST (2) DIT - University of Trento Trento,
OWL (Ontology Web Language and Applications) Maw-Sheng Horng Department of Mathematics and Information Education National Taipei University of Education.
A Kernel Revision Operator for Terminologies Algorithms and Evaluation
Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation
Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation
ece 720 intelligent web: ontology and beyond
Introduction to Description Logics
Jie Bao, Doina Caragea and Vasant G Honavar
Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation
Updating TBoxes in DL-Lite
Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation
Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation
Faezeh Ensan and Weichang Du
Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation
Description Logics.
Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation
CIS Monthly Seminar – Software Engineering and Knowledge Management IS Enterprise Modeling Ontologies Presenter : Dr. S. Vasanthapriyan Senior Lecturer.
Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation
U A B II III I IV 94.
Presentation transcript:

Inconsistencies, Negations and Changes in Ontologies Zhisheng Huang Vrije University Amsterdam The Netherlands Collaborative work with Giorgos Flouris and Dimitris Plexousakis (FORTH, Greece) Jeff Z. Pan (University of Aberdeen, UK) Holger Wache (VU) (AAAI 2006 Paper)

Outline of This Talk Ontology Evolution Inconsistency and Incoherence Negations Postulates of Ontology Changes Conclusions

Ontology Evolution

AGM Postulates for Belief Revision

Postulates for Contraction

Levi and Harper Identities

Problems for Ontology Revisions Many description logics (including OWL DL) are not AGM-compliant Problem: (implicit) negation and base recovery postulate

A little bit of Description Logics (DL) Knowledge Base Tbox (schema) Abox (data) Man  Human & Male Happy-Father  Man & some has- child Female and … John : Happy-Father h John, Mary i : has-child Inference System Interface

Variants of Inconsistencies in SW Schlobach at el.(IJCAI03): Incoherence: unsatisfiable concept in Tbox Huang at el. (IJCAI05): Classical sense of logical inconsistency Haase at el. (ISWC05): Example in a footnote. ……

Incoherence and Inconsistency Unsatisfiable concept in a Tbox: its interpretation is empty in any interpretation of Tbox Incoherent Tbox: there exists unsatisfiable concept Incoherent Ontology: its Tbox is incoherent Inconsistent Ontology: there exists no models

Example I: Coherent and Inconsistent Ontology C1 C2 disjoint a

Example II: Incoherent and Inconsistent Ontology C1 C2 disjoint a C3

Example III: Incoherent and consistent Ontology C1 C2 disjoint b C3 a

Example IV: Inconsistent (and coherent?) Ontology C1 C2 disjoint {a}

Consistency Negation

Coherence Negation

Example

New Postulates for Ontology Revision

New Postulates for Ontology Changes

Levi and Harper Identities

Conclusions Framework accounts for negation, inconsistency and change for DL-based ontologies for management of dynamic ontologies. Proposed negations achieve the Harper identity and Levi identity for ontology changes Distinction between incoherence and inconsistency provides us two different approaches covering different needs in different application scenarios