Borgida, A., and L. Serafini. Distributed description logics: Directed domain correspondences in federated information sources. In CoopIS/DOA/ODBASE, pp. 36--53, 2002.  Home/Search   Document Details and Download   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....are the contents of Section 6. The semantics of C OWL is obtained by modifying the OWL semantics [15] using the ideas and notions originally developed in the semantics of context (the, so called, Local Models Semantics [9, 10] Bridge rules were originally defined in [11] and further studied in [9, 10,4, 3]. The bridge rules proposed in this paper were first defined in [5] Finally the constructs for representing bridge rules have been taken from the context markup language CTxML [4] 2 Ontologies vs. Contexts, or globalize vs. localize At the architectural level, the crucial difference between ....

....ontologics In this section we incrementally extend modify the OWL global semantics, and in the last subsection, also its syntax, in order to be able to model the above examples. 5. 1 Directionality We modify the definition of interpretation given above according to the intuition described in [3]. The main idea is that we split a global interpretation into a family of (local) interpretations, one for each ontology. Furthermore, we allow for an ontology to be locally inconsistent, i.e. not to have a local interpretation. In this case we associate to Oi a special interpretation 7 , ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

A. Borgida and L. Scrafini. Distributed description logics: Directed domain correspondences in federated information sources. In R. Meetsman and Z. Tari, editors, On The Move to Meaningful Internet Systems 2002: CoopIS, Doa, and ODBase, volume 2519 of LNCS, pages 36-53. Springer Verlag, 2002.

....different views on the same part of the world and the definition of directed partial mappings between different modules. Recently, Borgida and Serafini defined a distributed version of description logics based on local model semantics that has all advantages of the contextual representations [5]. The problem of combining and reasoning with ontological modules is has become of central importance in research on knowledge representation and reasoning on the socalled semantic web. Current proposals for languages to encode ontological knowledge on the world wide web, i.e. the RDF schema [6] ....

....R i : Q M i is also a member of M . We will use this notion of a modular ontology in the following to investigate the problem of integrity of logical reasoning across modules. We define a model based semantics for modular ontologies using the notion of a distributed interpretation proposed by [5] in the context of distributed description logics: Definition 14 (Distributed Interpretation) A distributed interpretation = # i#Index , r# of a modular ontology M consists of interpretations i for the individual module M i over domains D i , such that: 9 Ontology Infrastructure for the ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

A. Borgida and L. Serafini. Distributed description logics: Directed domain correspondences in federated information sources. In R. Meersman and Z. Tari, editors, On The Move to Meaningful Internet Systems 2002.

....We will use this notion of a modular ontology in the following to investigate the problem of integrity of logical reasoning across modules. 2. 3 Semantics and Logical Consequence We define a model based semantics for modular ontologies using the notion of a distributed interpretation proposed by [Borgida and Serafini, 2002] in the context of distributed description logics: Definition 6 (Distributed Interpretation) A distributed interpretation # # i#Index , r# of a modular ontology consists of interpretations i for the individual module M i over domains # i , such that: C # i # i for all class ....

A. Borgida and L. Serafini. Distributed description logics: Directed domain correspondences in federated information sources. In Proceedings of the Intenational Conference on Cooperative Information Systems, 2002.

....We will use this notion of a modular ontology in the following to investigate the problem of integrity of logical reasoning across modules. 2. 3 Semantics and Logical Consequence We define a model based semantics for modular ontologies using the notion of a distributed interpretation proposed by [Borgida and Serafini, 2002] in the context of distributed description logics: Definition 6 (Distributed Interpretation) A distributed interpretation # # i#Index , r# of a modular ontology consists of interpretations i for the individual module M i over domains # i , such that: C # i # i for all concept ....

....domains again reflects the principle of loose coupling underlying our approach. Based on the notion of a distributed interpretation we can define a model of a modular ontology as an interpretation that satisfies the constraints imposed by internal and external concept definitions. In contrast to [Borgida and Serafini, 2002] , we do not introduce special operators for defining the relations between different domains, we rather interpret external concept definitions as constraints on the relation between the domains: Definition 7 (Logical Consequence) A distributed interpretation is a model for a modular ....

A. Borgida and L. Serafini. Distributed description logics: Directed domain correspondences in federated information sources. In Proceedings of the Intenational Conference on Cooperative Information Systems, 2002.

No context found.

A. Borgida and L. Serafini. Distributed description logics: Directed domain correspondences in federated information sources. In R. Meersman and Z. Tari, editors, On The Move to Meaningful Internet Systems 2002: CoopIS, Doa, and ODBase, vol. 2519 of LNCS, pages 36--53. Springer Verlag, 2002.

No context found.

A. Borgida and L. Serafini. Distributed description logics: Directed domain correspondences in federated information sources. In R. Meersman and Z. Tari, editors, On The Move to Meaningful Internet Systems 2002: CoopIS, Doa, and ODBase, volume 2519 of LNCS, pages 36--53. Springer Verlag, 2002.

No context found.

A. Borgida and L. Serafini, " Distributed Description Logics: Directed Domain Correspondences in Federated Information Sources", Proc. CoopIS'02, pp.36-53 (2002).

No context found.

A. Borgida and L. Serafini. Distributed description logics: Directed domain correspondences in federated information sources. In R. Meersman and Z. Tari, editors, On The Move to Meaningful Internet Systems 2002: CoopIS, Doa, and ODBase, volume 2519 of LNCS, pages 36--53. Springer Verlag, 2002.

....and domain knowledge. However, WORDNET could be replaced by another combination of a linguistic resource and a domain knowledge resource. The semantics introduced in Definition 4 can be viewed as an instance of the compatibility relation between contexts as defined in Local Models Semantics [13, 5]. Indeed, suppose we take a set of documents D as the domain of interpretation of the local models of two contexts c 1 and c 2 , and each concept as a unary predicate. If we see the documents associated to a concept as the interpretation of a predicate in a local model, then the relation we ....

A. Borgida and L. Serafini. Distributed description logics: Directed domain correspondences in federated information sources. In R. Meersman and Z. Tari, editors, On The Move to Meaningful Internet Systems 2002: CoopIS, Doa, and ODBase, volume 2519 of LNCS, pages 36--53. Springer Verlag, 2002.

No context found.

Borgida, A., and L. Serafini. Distributed description logics: Directed domain correspondences in federated information sources. In CoopIS/DOA/ODBASE, pp. 36--53, 2002.

No context found.

A. Borgida and L. Serafini. Distributed description logics: Directed domain correspondences in federated information sources. In Proceedings of the Intenational Conference on Cooperative Information Systems, 2002.

No context found.

A. Borgida and L. Serafini. Distributed description logics: Directed domain correspondences in federated information sources, 2002.

No context found.

A. Borgida and L. Sera ni. Distributed description logics: Directed domain correspondences in federated information sources. In R. Meersman and Z. Tari, editors, On The Move to Meaningful Internet Systems 2002: CoopIS, Doa, and ODBase, volume 2519 of LNCS, pages 36-53. Springer Verlag, 2002.

No context found.

A. Borgida and L. Sera ni. Distributed description logics: Directed domain correspondences in federated information sources. In R. Meersman and Z. Tari, editors, On The Move to Meaningful Internet Systems 2002: CoopIS, Doa, and ODBase, volume 2519 of LNCS, pages 36-53. Springer Verlag, 2002.

No context found.

A. Borgida and L. Serafini. Distributed description logics: Directed domain correspondences in federated information sources. LNCS 2519, 2002,

No context found.

A. Borgida and L. Serafini. Distributed description logics: Directed domain correspondences in federated information sources. In On The Move to Meaningful Internet Systems 2002.

No context found.

A. Borgida and L. Serafini. Distributed description logics: Directed domain correspondences in federated information sources. In On The Move to Meaningful Internet Systems 2002.

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