Of 35 lecture 17: semantic web rules. of 35 ece 627, winter ‘132 logic importance - high-level language for expressing knowledge - high expressive power.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Artificial Intelligence
Advertisements

CH-4 Ontologies, Querying and Data Integration. Introduction to RDF(S) RDF stands for Resource Description Framework. RDF is a standard for describing.
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.
Rigorous Software Development CSCI-GA Instructor: Thomas Wies Spring 2012 Lecture 11.
An Introduction to RDF(S) and a Quick Tour of OWL
Answer Set Programming Overview Dr. Rogelio Dávila Pérez Profesor-Investigador División de Posgrado Universidad Autónoma de Guadalajara
Of 27 lecture 7: owl - introduction. of 27 ece 627, winter ‘132 OWL a glimpse OWL – Web Ontology Language describes classes, properties and relations.
1 Ontology Language Comparisons doug foxvog 16 September 2004.
AI - Week 13 Knowledge Representation, Logic, Semantic Web Lee McCluskey, room 2/07
CPSC 322, Lecture 23Slide 1 Logic: TD as search, Datalog (variables) Computer Science cpsc322, Lecture 23 (Textbook Chpt 5.2 & some basic concepts from.
CPSC 322, Lecture 23Slide 1 Logic: TD as search, Datalog (variables) Computer Science cpsc322, Lecture 23 (Textbook Chpt 5.2 & some basic concepts from.
Ontology and Ontology-Based Applications C. Farkas Some of the slides were obtained from presentations of Ian Horrocks.
TR1413: Discrete Mathematics For Computer Science Lecture 3: Formal approach to propositional logic.
Knowledge Representation I (Propositional Logic) CSE 473.
Modelling Conceptual Knowledge using Logic - Week 6 Lee McCluskey Department of Computing and Mathematical Sciences University of Huddersfield.
Semantic Web and its Logical Foundations Serguei Krivov, Ecoinformatics Collaboratory Gund Institute for Ecological Economics, UVM.
From SHIQ and RDF to OWL: The Making of a Web Ontology Language
FIRST ORDER LOGIC Levent Tolga EREN.
RDF (Resource Description Framework) Why?. XML XML is a metalanguage that allows users to define markup XML separates content and structure from formatting.
DEDUCTIVE DATABASE.
Ming Fang 6/12/2009. Outlines  Classical logics  Introduction to DL  Syntax of DL  Semantics of DL  KR in DL  Reasoning in DL  Applications.
Building an Ontology of Semantic Web Techniques Utilizing RDF Schema and OWL 2.0 in Protégé 4.0 Presented by: Naveed Javed Nimat Umar Syed.
1 Knowledge Based Systems (CM0377) Lecture 4 (Last modified 5th February 2001)
SPARQL negation Rules of the Semantic Web Semantic MediaWiki NSWI Jan Dědek.
Declarative vs Procedural Programming  Procedural programming requires that – the programmer tell the computer what to do. That is, how to get the output.
Michael Eckert1CS590SW: Web Ontology Language (OWL) Web Ontology Language (OWL) CS590SW: Semantic Web (Winter Quarter 2003) Presentation: Michael Eckert.
Pattern-directed inference systems
Of 41 lecture 4: rdf – basics and language. of 41 RDF basic ideas the fundamental concepts of RDF  resources  properties  statements ece 720, winter.
Semantic Web Constraint Language complement and the editor development in Protégé Piao Guangyuan.
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.
Visualizing SWRL Rules Using Grailog Frame Formulas Team 8 : Bo Yan Juyan Zhang Ismail Akbari Instructor: Harold Boley.
3.2 Semantics. 2 Semantics Attribute Grammars The Meanings of Programs: Semantics Sebesta Chapter 3.
Programming Languages and Design Lecture 3 Semantic Specifications of Programming Languages Instructor: Li Ma Department of Computer Science Texas Southern.
Of 33 lecture 1: introduction. of 33 the semantic web vision today’s web (1) web content – for human consumption (no structural information) people search.
For Wednesday Read chapter 9, sections 1-3 Homework: –Chapter 7, exercises 8 and 9.
For Friday Read chapter 8 Homework: –Chapter 7, exercises 2 and 10 Program 1, Milestone 2 due.
1 CSC384: Intro to Artificial Intelligence Lecture 5.  Knowledge Representation.
The Semantic Web Riccardo Rosati Dottorato in Ingegneria Informatica Sapienza Università di Roma a.a. 2006/07.
Nikolaj Bjørner Microsoft Research DTU Winter course January 2 nd 2012 Organized by Flemming Nielson & Hanne Riis Nielson.
DEDUCTION PRINCIPLES AND STRATEGIES FOR SEMANTIC WEB Chain resolution and its fuzzyfication Dr. Hashim Habiballa University of Ostrava.
Dr. Bhavani Thuraisingham September 18, 2006 Building Trustworthy Semantic Webs Lecture #9: Logic and Inference Rules.
Marcelo Tallis and Robert M. Balzer USC/ISI and Teknowledge Corp.
ece 627 intelligent web: ontology and beyond
SWRL Semantic Web Rule Language Susana R. Novoa UNIK4710.
1 Nov. 2, 2005 Design and Application of Rule Based Access Control Policies Huiying Li, Xiang Zhang, Honghan Wu & Yuzhong Qu Dept. Computer.
1 Propositional Logic Limits The expressive power of propositional logic is limited. The assumption is that everything can be expressed by simple facts.
Albert Gatt LIN3021 Formal Semantics Lecture 3. Aims This lecture is divided into two parts: 1. We make our first attempts at formalising the notion of.
1 First Order Logic CS 171/271 (Chapter 8) Some text and images in these slides were drawn from Russel & Norvig’s published material.
Presented by Kyumars Sheykh Esmaili Description Logics for Data Bases (DLHB,Chapter 16) Semantic Web Seminar.
Of 29 lecture 15: description logic - introduction.
Rules in SW Semantic Web - Spring 2008 Computer Engineering Department Sharif University of Technology.
Semantic Web in Depth Rules Dr Nicholas Gibbins
BBY 464 Semantic Information Management (Spring 2016) Ontologies and OWL: Web Ontology Language Yaşar Tonta & Orçun Madran [yasartonta,
Knowledge Representation Lecture 2 out of 5. Last Week Intelligence needs knowledge We need to represent this knowledge in a way a computer can process.
OWL, DL and rules Based on slides from Grigoris Antoniou, Frank van Harmele and Vassilis Papataxiarhis.
Logic: TD as search, Datalog (variables)
Knowledge Representation Part II Description Logic & Introduction to Protégé Jan Pettersen Nytun.
ece 720 intelligent web: ontology and beyond
Using Rules with Ontologies in the Semantic Web
ece 720 intelligent web: ontology and beyond
Rules, RIF and RuleML.
Ontology.
ece 720 intelligent web: ontology and beyond
Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation
Logic: Top-down proof procedure and Datalog
CPSC 322 Introduction to Artificial Intelligence
Ontology.
Deniz Beser A Fundamental Tradeoff in Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Hector J. Levesque and Ronald J. Brachman.
Representations & Reasoning Systems (RRS) (2.2)
A Tutorial Summary of Description Logic and Hybrid Rules
Presentation transcript:

of 35 lecture 17: semantic web rules

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘132 logic importance - high-level language for expressing knowledge - high expressive power - well-understood formal semantics - precise notion of logical consequence - systems that can automatically derive statements syntactically from a set of premises

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘133 logic importance (2) - proof systems for which semantic logical consequence coincides with syntactic derivation within the proof system soundness & completeness - predicate logic is unique in the sense that sound and complete proof systems do exist not the case for more expressive logics (higher-order logics)

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘134 logic importance (3) - trace the proof that leads to a logical consequence - logic can provide explanations for answers by tracing a proof

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘135 specializations of logic RDF and OWL - RDF/S and OWL (Lite and DL) are specializations of predicate logic – they correspond (roughly) to a description logic - they define reasonable subsets of logic - trade-off between the expressive power and the computational complexity (the more expressive the language, the less efficient the corresponding proof systems)

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘136 specializations of logic Horn logic a rule has the form: A1,..., An  B - Ai and B are atomic formulas

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘137 specializations of logic Horn logic there are two ways of reading such a rule - deductive if A1,..., An are known to be true, then B is also true - reactive if the conditions A1,..., An are true, then carry out the action B

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘138 logic: description vs Horn OWL vs rules it is impossible to assert that a person X who is brother of Y is uncle of Z (where Z is child of Y) in OWL this can be done easily using rules: brother(X,Y), childOf(Z,Y)  uncle(X,Z)

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘139 logic: description vs Horn OWL vs rules (2) rules cannot assert the information that a person is either a man or a woman this information is easily expressed in OWL using disjoint union OWL needs rules !!!

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘1310 rule languages rule languages define how to synthesize new facts form those stored in the knowledge base - rule markup language – RuleML - semantic web rule language - SWRL

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘1311 rule markup language RuleML - effort to standardize inference rules - RuleML is a markup language for publishing and sharing rule bases on the World Wide Web - focus is on rule interoperation between industry standards - provides an XML syntax for Datalog clauses

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘1312 rule markup language Datalog its alphabet is a set of predicate symbols, constants, and variables atom – is an expression of the form P(t1, t2, …, tn), where P is an n-ary predicate symbol and t1, …, tn are terms term – is a variable or constant

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘1313 rule markup language Datalog – examples (1):book(“Semantic Web”, “U.K.”, “2007”) (2):book(title, counry, “2005”)

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘1314 rule markup language Datalog – clause clause is either a fact or a rule fact is an expression of the form B where B is a variable-free atom rule is an expression of the form A1, …, Am  C where A1, …, Am atoms are called antecedents, C atom is called the consequent or head

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘1315 rule markup language Datalog – example (3):book(x, “U.K.”, y)  UKbook(x)

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘1316 rule markup language RuleML – example (1) book(“Semantic Web”, “U.K.”, “2007”) book Semantic Web U.K. 2007

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘1317 rule markup language RuleML – example (2) book(tilte, country, “2005”) book title country 2007

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘1318 rule markup language RuleML – example (3) book(x, “U.K.”, y)  UKbook(x) UKbook x

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘1319 rule markup language RuleML – example (3) continuation book x U.K. y

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘1320 SWRL - SWRL is an acronym for Semantic Web Rule Language - SWRL is intended to be the rule language of the Semantic Web - SWRL is based on OWL: all rules are expressed in terms of OWL concepts (classes, properties, individuals, literals...).

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘1321 SWRL atoms (predicates) C(x)C is an OWL class P(x,y)P is an OWL predicate sameAs(x,y)sameAs belongs to the OWL differentFrom(x,y)differentFrom belongs to the OWL vocabulary builtIn(r,x,…)r is a built-in relation x,y – are either variables, individuals, or data values

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘1322 SWRL example (1) from Datalog book(“Semantic Web”, “U.K.”, “2007”) 1. Book(B) 2. title(B,”Semantic Web”) 3. countryOfPub(B,”U.K”) 4. yearOfPub(B,”2007”)

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘1323 SWRL atoms (predicates) differences to Datalog - atoms are only unary or binary predicates (no restrictions in RuleML) - OWL class descriptions can be viewed as unary predicates (nothing like that in RuleML)

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘1324 SWRL atoms (predicates) – 1 C(x)C is an OWL class holds iff x is an individual of the class description or data range C Person(John) Person(?x)

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘1325 SWRL atoms (predicates) – 2 P(x,y)P is an OWL predicate holds iff x is related to y by property P hasBrother(John, Bill) hasBrother(John, ?y) hasBrother(?x, ?y)

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘1326 SWRL atoms (predicates) – 3 sameAs(x,y)sameAs belongs to the OWL vocabulary holds iff x is interpreted as the same object y sameAs(?x, ?y)

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘1327 SWRL atoms (predicates) – 4 differentFrom(x,y)differentFrom belongs to the OWL vocabulary holds iff x and y are interpreted as different objects differentFrom(?x, ?y)

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘1328 SWRL atoms (predicates) – 5 builtIn(r,x,…)r is a built-in relation holds iff the built-in relation r holds for the interpretations of the arguments swrlb:greaterThan(?x,?y) (builtIn(greaterThan,?x,?y)) swrlb:startsWith(?x, "+")

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘1329 SWRL rule example – reclassification Man(?m) → Person(?m)

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘1330 SWRL rule example – property value assignment Person(?p) hasSibling(?p, ?s) Man(?s) hasBrother(?p, ?s)

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘1331 SWRL rule example – named individuals Person(Fred) hasSibling(Fred, ?s) Man(?s) hasBrother(Fred, ?s)

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘1332 SWRL rule example – with individuals & literals Person(Fred) hasSibling(Fred, ?s) Man(?s) hasAge(?s, 40) has40YearOldBrother(Fred, ?s)

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘1333 SWRL rule example – with built-ins hasBrother(?x1,?x2) hasAge(?x1,?age1) hasAge(?x2,?age2) swrlb:greaterThan(?age2,?age1) hasOlderBrother(?x1,?x2)

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘1334 SWRL rule example – with built-ins (2) hasBrother(?x1,?x2) hasAge(?x1,?age1) hasAge(?x2,?age2) swrlb:subtract(10,?age2,?age1) hasDecadeOlderBrother(?x1,?x2)

of 35 ece 627, winter ‘1335 SWRL characteristics - W3C Submission in rules saved as part of ontology - increasing tool support: Bossam, R2ML, Hoolet, Pellet, KAON2, RacerPro, SWRLTab - can work with reasoners