S. Decker. On domain-specific declarative knowledge representation and database languages. In Proc. of the 5th Knowledge Representation meets Databases Workshop (KRDB98), pages  Home/Search   Document Details and Download   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....a high value community web portal, where the development and maintenance process consists of the stages requirements elicitation, web site design, ontology engineering and query formulation. The reasoning service for the portal was provided by SiLRI [13] which is essentially based on F Logic [24, 12], only ground facts may alternatively be provided in RDF syntax. F Logic fits nicely with the structures proposed for RDF and RDFS, however, F Logic does not offer any support for interoperability of representation mechanisms, i.e. axioms written in F Logic and the implicit knowledge that comes ....

S. Decker. On domain-specific declarative knowledge representation and database languages. In Proc. of the 5th Knowledge Representation meets Databases Workshop (KRDB98), pages 9.1--9.7, 1998.

....portability only ANSI SQL statements are used in the system. All data structures can be serialized into files, different formats like our internal XML representation OXML, Frame Logic [15] RDF Schema [29] and OIL [14] are supported. An F Logic inference engine described in further detail in [4] can be accessed in OntoEdit. 3 Methodology The acquisition methodology underlying our approach describing a cyclic acquisition process is depicted in figure 2. The reader may note that this method has shown its usefulness within in our application scenarios, however we do not claim, that this ....

S. Decker. On domain-specific declarative knowledge representation and database languages. In Proc. of the 5th Knowledge Representation meets Databases Workshop (KRDB98), pages

.... e.g. domain specific dictionaries WordNet Ontology GermaNet WordNet Ontology GermaNet Select core ontology Built core ontology Multi Strategy Learning Result Set Figure 1: Architecture of the Ontology Learning Approach F Logic inference engine described in further detail in (Decker, 1998) can be accessed from OntoEdit. 3 Methodology Parallel to the architecture wedeveloped an ontology acquisition methodology that emphasizes the semiautomatic manner of ontology construction. Figure 2 depicts the cyclic acquistion process. The cycle starts with the selection of a generic core ....

S. Decker. 1998. On domain-specific declarative knowledge representation and database languages.

....proceed through a few intriguing examples of our categorizations of axiom specifications listed above. We give examples that illustrate the benefits of our approach by translation to two prominent ontology modeling mechanisms, viz. a frame representation (F(rame) Logic (Kifer, Lausen, Wu, 1995; Decker, 1998)) and a description logics representation (LOOM (Woods Schmolze, 1992; MacGregor, 1994) Exploiting the expressiveness of F Logic, we specify translation axioms that work directly on the object representation of axioms when possible, thus describing a formally concise and executable ....

....of the closed world assumption. Our basic principle aims at conceptual abstraction through advanced modeling strategies rather than through omnipotent logical theories, while still leaving the door open for more sophisticated nonmonotonic reasoning. In fact, regarding our F Logic inference engine (Decker, 1998), the strategy is also efficient inferencing terminates in polynomial time with a well founded semantics when no function symbols are used. 3.7 Temporal and modal contexts Temporal and or modal contexts are often indispensable for practical applications. However, they often make it difficult ....

Decker, S. 1998. On domain-specific declarative knowledge representation and database languages. In Proc. of the 5th Knowledge Representation meets Databases Workshop (KRDB98), 9.1--9.7.

....a few simple examples of our categorizations of axiom specifications listed above. In particular our scheme is, 1) to show the representations of axioms in RDF(S) and (2) to show a structurally equivalent F(rame) Logic representation that may easily be derived from its RDF(S) counterpart (cf. [9, 3] on F Logic) Then, 3) we exploit the expressiveness of F Logic in order to specify translation axioms that work directly on the F Logic object representation of axioms. Thus, 2) in combination with (3) describes a formally concise and executable translation. For better illustration, we ....

S. Decker. On domain-specific declarative knowledge representation and database languages. In Proc. of the 5th Knowledge Representation meets Databases Workshop (KRDB98), pages

....a few simple examples of our categorization of axiom specifications listed above. In particular our scheme is, A) to show the representations of axioms in RDF(S) and (B) to show a structurally equivalent F(rame) Logic representation that may easily be derived from its RDF(S) counterpart (cf. [11,3] on F Logic) Then, C) we exploit the expressiveness of F Logic in order to specify translation axioms that work directly on the F Logic object representation of axioms. Thus, B) in combination with (C) describes a formally concise and executable translation. For better illustration, we finally, ....

Stefan Decker. On domain-specific declarative knowledge representation and database languages. In Proc. of the 5th Knowledge Representation meets Databases Workshop (KRDB98), pages 9.1--9.7, 1998.

....25 09 1998; 12:41; p.12 13 an extraordinary effort. Instead a Frame Logic translator translates the Frame Logic expressions via several intermediate states to first order logic expressions. Table II gives an idea of how this translation is performed. After several transformation steps (cf. Decker 98) Fensel et al. 98c) for more details) we obtain a normal logic program. Techniques from deductive databases are applicable to implement the bottom up fix point evaluation procedure. Because we allow negation in the clause body we have to carefully select an appropriate semantics and evaluation ....

S. Decker. On Domain-Specific Declarative Knowledge Representation and Database Languages In: Proceedings of the 5th KRDB Workshop (KRDB98), Seattle, WA, 31-May-1998, Eds: A. Borgida, V. Chaudri, M. Staudt

....a few simple examples of our categorization of axiom specifications listed above. In particular our scheme is, A) to show the representations of axioms in RDF(S) and (B) to show a structurally equivalent F(rame) Logic representation that may easily be derived from its RDF(S) counterpart (cf. [9, 3] on F Logic) Then, C) we exploit the expressiveness of F Logic in order to specify translation axioms that work directly on the F Logic object representation of axioms. Thus, B) in combination with (C) describes a formally concise and executable translation. For better illustration, we finally, ....

Stefan Decker. On domain-specific declarative knowledge representation and database languages. In Proc. of the 5th Knowledge Representation meets Databases Workshop (KRDB98), pages 9.1--9.7, 1998.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC