M. R. Genesereth and R. E. Fikes. Knowledge Interchange Format, Version 3.0 Reference Manual. Technical Report Logic-92-1, Stanford, CA, USA, 1992.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....ontologies that conform to the RDFS specification, including strange constructs such as slot constraints with multiple slots and classes. This is made easier by the fact that, unlike OIL, the semantics of DAML OIL are directly defined in both a model theoretic and an axiomatic form (using KIF [ Genesereth and Fikes, 1992 ] The meaning given to strange constructs may, however, include strange side e#ects . For example, in the case of a slot constraint with multiple slots and classes, the semantics interpret this in the same way as a conjunction of all the constraints that Property is the RDF name for a binary ....

M. R. Genesereth and R. E. Fikes. Knowledge Interchange Format, Version 3.0 Reference Manual. Technical Report Logic-92-1, Stanford University, 1992.

....level ontologies 6.2 Knowledge Interchange Format. KIF,orKnowledge Interchange Format, is a formal language for the interchange of knowledge among computer programs written by different programmers at different times and in different languages. The ontology underlying KIF can be extracted from [12]# we summarize the main points as follows. The most general category of entityinKIF is that of object. This notion is quite broad: objects can be concrete (e.g. alumpof rock, Nietzsche, a molecule) or abstract (the concept of justice, the number two)# objects can be simple or complex, and even ....

Genesereth, M. R., Fikes, R. E. Knowledge Interchange Format, Version 3.0, Reference Manual, Logic Group Report Logic-92-1, Computer Science Department, Stanford University.

....as the ability to pose questions to the knowledge base and receive answers in return. One way of enabling this functionality is to represent the symbolic information in the world model in a logic based, computerinterpretable format, such as in the Knowledge Interface Format (KIF) representation [8]. Through the use of an inference engine or theorem prover, information represented in this format could be queried, and logically proven answers could be returned. As an example, a manufacturer may want to know whether a given set of fixture positions is suitable to fully inspect a part. ....

Gensereth M., Fikes R. 1992. Knowledge Interchange Format. Stanford Logic Report Logic-92-1, Stanford Univ. http://logic.stanford.edu/kif/kif.html .

.... While at first glance it seems to be relatively easy to define a proper formal semantics for the so called content level of agent languages (in contrast to the speech act illocution encoded by means of performatives) as it has been done using, e.g. first order predicate calculus for KIF [8], there is still no general model of the actual usage and e#ects of utterances in social encounters, a field which is traditionally studied in linguistical pragmatics and sociology. Currently, two major approaches to the meaning of agent communication in a broader sense, covering both traditional ....

M. R. Genesereth, R. E. Fikes. Knowledge Interchange Format, Version 3.0 Reference Manual. Technical Report Logic-92-1, Stanford University, Stanford, 1992.

....on formally encoding the rules of the road based upon the Driver Education Task Analysis: Instructional Objectives document [3] developed by the Human Resources Research Organization for the Department of Transportation. The ontology is represented in the Knowledge Interchange Format (KIF) [4]. An example of a KIF axiom is included below. If the force on the car prior to an occurrence of the accelerate activity is acc, then the force on the car after the occurrence is increased by the amount increment. forall ( car acc occ increment) and (occurrence of occ (accelerate ....

Genesereth M., Fikes R. 1992. Knowledge Interchange Format. Stanford Logic Report Logic-92-1, Stanford Univ. http://logic.stanford.edu/kif/kif.html. This work is being performed under the auspices of the DARPA-funded MARS project. [2]

....task behaviors that are expressed in a state graph formalism at each level of the hierarchy. Specifically, a hierarchy of behavior generating processes is being defined with planning horizons from 50 ms to 100 minutes. The MARS ontology is represented in the Knowledge Interchange Format (KIF) [4]. An example of a KIF axioms represented in the MARS ontology is included below. If the force on the car prior to an occurrence of the accelerate activity is acc, then the force on the car after the occurrence is increased by the amount increment. forall ( car acc occ increment) and ....

Genesereth M., Fikes R. 1992. Knowledge Interchange Format. Stanford Logic Report Logic-92-1, Stanford Univ. http://logic.stanford.edu/kif/kif.html.

....student must be enrolled in at least one course ) As [17] points out, while the purpose of an ontology is to define terminology, the form of an ontology is that of a knowledge base or database conceptual schema. Since ontologies are usually represented in logic fiavoured languages (such as KIF [4] and CycL [10] in this paper we will often view an ontology as a first order theory. It is instructive to see how taxonomic information can be represented in logic. Consider the tree in Figure I (all figures are presented at the end of this paper) which represents classes of staff in the School ....

M.R. Genesereth and R.E. Fikes. Knowledge Interchange Format, Version 3.0, Reference Manual. Technical Report Logic-92-1, Computer Science Department, Stanford University 1992.

....of a CM is to support the communication of neural networks in a portable fashion. Because a CM does not require the use of a specific representation language in order to be communicated between agents, CMs may be represented and communicated in a variety of languages including LISP, Prolog and KIF [6]. CMs may also be represented as objects comprised of multiple subobjects. For example, table 1 shows an InputWeights object that is comprised of a set of parameters including a learning parameter (learn param) that is defined by a LP subobject [3] Note that because of its modular structure, a CM ....

M. R. Gesenereth and R. Fikes. Knowledge interchange format, version 3.0 reference manual. Technical Report Logic9201, Computer Science Department, Stanford University, 1992.

....PAL toolset plug in for Protege 2000. The idea is to allow the user to write constraints over the possible values of instances that cannot be represented using only classes, slots and pre defined facets. 11 PAL is a limited predicate logic extension of Protege 2000. Its syntax is similar to KIF [5]. However, statements like deftelation and derfunction are not supported. The PAL language is completely integrated with the Protg 2000 knowledge model. Constraints are instances of the :pal constraint class. When writing a PAL constraint, we can use any slot as a predicate, for instance ....

Genesereth, M.: Knowledge Interchange Format. In:J. Allen and R. Fikes and E. Sandewall (eds.): KR91 Proceedings, Morgan Kaufmann: 599-600, 1991.

....symbols with similar property are also referred to as variable arity , variadic or multiple arity symbols. Languages with sequence variables and variable arity symbols have been used in various areas. Here we enumerate some of them: Knowledge management Knowledge Interchange Format KIF ([10]) and its version SKIF ( 23] are extensions of first order language with (among other constructs) individual and sequence variables and variable arity function symbols. KIF is used to interchange knowledge among disparate computer systems. Another example of using sequence variables and variable ....

.... Mathematica programming language and rewrite rule languages, and the role of sequence variables in this relation is discussed in [4] Theorem proving the Epilog package ( 9] can be used in programs that manipulate information encoded in Standard Information Format (SIF) a subset of KIF ([10]) language, containing sequence variables and variable arity symbols. Among the other routines, Epilog includes pattern matchers of various sorts, and an inference procedure based on model elimination. These applications involve (and in some cases, essentially depend on) solving equations with ....

M. R. Genesereth and R. E. Fikes. Knowledge Interchange Format, Version 3.0 Reference Manual. Technical Report Logic-92-1, Computer Science Department, Stanford University, Stanford, June 1992.

....Flexible arity symbols are not assigned unique arity. Sequence variables and flexible arity symbols add flexibility and expressiveness into a language , which makes them a useful tool in many applications: knowledge engineering and artificial intelligence (Knowledge Interchange Format KIF [GF92] and its version SKIF [HM01] databases (Sequence Datalog [MB95] Sequence Logic [GW92] programming (programming language of Mathematica [Wol99] term rewriting (rewriting with sequences [Ham97] WB01] However, theorem proving with sequence variables and flexible arity symbols is not ....

M. R. Genesereth and R. E. Fikes. Knowledge Interchange Format, Version 3.0 Reference Manual. Technical Report Logic-92-1, Computer Science Department, Stanford University, Stanford, California, US, June 1992.

....and changing team strategies, and possibly upon positions of their internal states that should be communicated to help keep teammate information up to date. In addition, they must choose a set of acceptable message types. The messages can use any syntactic and semantic codes (KQML [3] and KIF [5] for example) The only requirement is that the agents also agree on a mapping from message type to response requirements. Finally, the target field can be used to indicate the intended recipient(s) of the message. It could be intended for a single team member, for some subset of them, or for ....

M. R. Genesereth and R. E. Fikes. Knowledge interchange format, version 3.0 reference manual. Technical Report Logic-92-1, Computer Science Department, Stanford University, 1992.

....resources for semi automatically construct and populate ontologies. We will not expand on this topic here as it is peripheral to our theme of ontology mapping. As a result of our versatile ontology acquisition step, we have to deal with a variety of ontology language formats ranging from KIF [17] and Ontolingua to OCML [30] RDF [26] Prolog, and native Protg knowledge bases. This introduces the second step in our process, that of translation. As we have declaratively specified the IF Map method in Horn logic and execute it with the aim of a Prolog engine, we partially translate the ....

R. Genesereth and R. Fikes. Knowledge Interchange Format. Computer Science Dept., Stanford University, 3.0 edition, 1992. Technical Report, Logic-92-1.

....taken from [SV00] Understanding each other. When agent are heterogeneous, they must agree on a common protocol. Independent aspects of the protocol are information content, message format and coordination conventions. Among other, existing protocols for these three levels are KIF for content [GF92] KQML for message format [FMFM94] and COOL for coordination [Mat95] Planning Communicative Acts. Communication actions might alter the beliefs of other agents and therefore modify the external world. As a consequence, their execution is planned in the same way other actions are. The theory of ....

M. R. Genesereth and R. E. Fikes. Knowledge interchange format, version 3.0 reference manual. Technical Report Logic-02-1, Computer Science Department, Stanford University, 1992.

....we are only concerned with the security of the system and its components (leaving design methodologies to others) Several multi agent systems are available as commercial products and many more have been implemented in various research projects, with varying success. Recent standardisation efforts [6], 4] have proven rather successful and are still evolving. Today there is growing interest and research in implementing and rolling out (open) multi agent systems on a wider scale . Mobile VCE (www.mobilevce.com) is undertaking one such project where the agent paradigm is researched in a ....

M. Genesereth and R. Fikes. Knowledge interchange format, version 3.0 reference manual. Technical Report Logic-92-1, Computer Science Department, Stanford University, USA, 1992.

.... of the agent content language, assuming a PA = white boxes gray boxes Ontology Skills Tasks World User model Self Network PA = white boxes gray boxes Ontology Skills Tasks World User model Self KQML like message structure [5] and a content language resembling SL0, SL1 or KIF [7]. SAs use ontologies to interpret the incoming messages and thus provide the required service. Ontologies are also used by the SAs for building and modifying local representations. The PAs employ the ontologies in the same way and additionally for communicating with the user. An interesting point ....

Geneserth, M., Fikes, R.: Knowledge interchange format, version 3.0, Reference Manual, Tech Report Logic-92-1, Computer Science Department, Stanford University, (1992).

....of sharing heterogeneous uncertain information is not involved in these studies. One of the most important e orts on knowledge sharing, which must be specially mentioned, is Knowledge Interchange Format (KIF) proposed by Genesereth, Fikes, Patil, Patel Schneider, Mckay, Finin, Gruber and Neches [18, 19, 62]. KIF aims at attacking the heterogeneous language problem. KIF can be considered as an interlingua for knowledge sharing and communication among heterogeneous agents. Actually, a sending agent translates knowledge from its application speci c representation into the interlingua for communication ....

M.R. Genesereth, R.E. Fikes, and et al., Knowledge Interchange Format, Version

....of sharing heterogeneous uncertain information is not involved in these studies. One of the most important e orts on knowledge sharing, which must be specially mentioned, is Knowledge Interchange Format (KIF) proposed by Genesereth, Fikes, Patil, Patel Schneider, Mckay, Finin, Gruber and Neches [18, 19, 62]. KIF aims at attacking the heterogeneous language problem. KIF can be considered as an interlingua for knowledge sharing and communication among heterogeneous agents. Actually, a sending agent translates knowledge from its application speci c representation into the interlingua for communication ....

M.R. Genesereth, Knowledge Interchange Format, Proceedings of the Conference of the Principle of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pp. 599-600, 1991.

....of for every two employees both of whom have IDs, if the two employees are not the same, their IDs cannot be identical. Figure 1 shows this axiom in Protg Axiom Language (PAL) which is an axiom language for the Protg 2000 ontology editing environment based on Knowledge Interchange Format (KIF) [5]. Even if a domain expert understood the formulation of the axiom, he would still have to struggle with the foreign syntax (Figure 1) These factors can lead to a failure to encode critical knowledge realizable only through axioms. For example, in Ontolingua [7] only about 10 of the ontologies ....

Genesereth, M.R. and Fikes, R.E., Knowledge Interchange Format, Version 0.3, Reference Manual, Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Stanford University, 1992.

....approach in which ontologies are maintained in a simple format that is compatible with multiple representations. Ontologies written in this for mat are then translated into the different executable representations used by different problem solving agents. The Knowledge Interchange Format (KIF) [Genesereth and Fikes, 1991], On tolingua [Gruber, 1992] and the Conceptual Modeling Language (CML) Wielinga et al. 1992, Schreiber et al. 1994] are examples of formalisms that implement this approach. Being an ontol ogy, or meta ontology, for defining ontologies, these languages provide a vocabulary and a certain ....

....here is in identifying the terminology used. 2.2.2. 1 Knowledge Interchange Format The Knowledge Interchange Format is defined as a formal language for the interchange of knowl edge among disparate computer programs written by different programmers, at different times, in different languages [Genesereth and Fikes, 1991]. It is intended to be neither a language for human interaction nor an internal representation for knowledge within a computer programs. When a program reads a knowledge base written in KIF, it translates the data into its own internal repre sentation. When it needs to communicate with other ....

M.R.. Genesereth and R.E. Fikes. Knowledge Interchange Format, version 3.0 reference manual. Technical Report LOGIC-92-1, Computer Science Department, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, June 1991.

....level ontologies .2 Knowledge Interchange Format. KIF, or Knowledge Interchange Format, is a formal language for the interchange of knowledge among computer programs written by different programmers at different times and in different languages. The ontology underlying KIF can be extracted from [12]; we summarize the main points as follows. The most general category of entity in KIF is that of object. This notion is quite broad: objects can be concrete (e.g. a lump of rock, Nietzsche, a molecule) or abstract (the concept of justice, the number two) objects can be simple or complex, and even ....

Genesereth, M. R., Fikes, R. E. Knowledge Interchange Format, Ver- sion 3.0, Reference Manual, Logic Group Report Logic-92-1, Computer Science Department, Stanford University.

....Sharing Effort. A KQML API would be used in order to allow the interoperation of MIX and KQML agents. A knowledge agent is being implemented with the CLIPS rule based shell [9] capable of interpreting knowledge oriented performatives. A subset of the KIF (Knowledge Interchange Format) language [7], also developed in the framework of the Knowledge Sharing Effort, is being considered for inclusion as another native language of the platform. Regarding the network model, a federation architecture for YP agents is being designed. The reason for this improvement is to assure system functioning ....

M. Genesereth, R. Fikes, et al. Knowledge Interchange Format, version 3.0. Reference manual. Technical report, Computer Science Department, Stanford University, 1992.

....is habit to implement multiagent systems with the existing programming languages, mainly through object oriented languages. They make possible and convenient modelling agents as active object [6] There are two noteworthy proposals about AOp from the ARPA Knowledge Sharing Effort (KSE) Group [7, 8] and from the Foundation for Intelligent Physical Agent (FIPA) 9,10,11] The former works at the level of communication among agents and is aimed on developing techniques and a methodology for building large scale knowledge bases that are sharable and reusable. For instance the Knowledge Query ....

....an AP (AP1 and AP2) can support more than one domain. According to FIPA, the Agent Universe (AU) is represented by the set of all domains inside the agent community. IIOP Agent Platform 1 Agent Platform 2 Domain X Domain Y Domain Z AMS ACC x DF A B C D E y DF DF z AMS ACC Figure 8. Agent Platform Reference Model (fragment) The DF has been introduced in order to support cooperation among agents. In literature there are several proposals about cooperation [24,25] but FIPA does not impose any of them, it simply offers the parameters service name and service type to classify ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

M. R. Genesereth, "Knowledge Interchange Format", draft proposed American National Standard (dpANS), NCITS.T2/98-004, 1998, available at htpp://logic.stanford.edu/kif

....among (possibly heterogeneous) agents and neural network environments. Because a CM does not require the use of a specific representation language in order to be used or communicated between agents, CMs may be represented and communicated in a variety of languages including LISP, Prolog and KIF [6]. CMs may also be represented as objects comprised of multiple subobjects. For example, table 1 shows an InputWeights object that is comprised of a set of parameters including a learning parameter (learn param) that is defined by a LP subobject [3] Note that because of its modular structure, a ....

M. R. Gesenereth and R. Fikes. Knowledge interchange format, version 3.0 reference manual. Technical Report Logic9201, Computer Science Department, Stanford University, 1992.

....contain implementation information in order for Specware to generate code from them. Ontolingua Ontolingua, was developed specifically for the purpose of knowledge sharing and reuse in the context of knowledge based systems, not for the development of software in general. Ontolingua, based on KIF [6], was to facilitate reuse and interoperability by acting as an interchange format so that knowledge bases could be translated into and out of it. However, there is no inference engine for Ontolingua, thus, unlike Slang, the only way an ontology written in Ontolingua can be used (by machine) is ....

M.R. Genesereth and R.E. Fikes. Knowledge interchange format, version 3.0 reference manual. Technical Report Logic-92-1, Computer Science Department, Stanford University, 1992.

....and convey, within a given context, the mental concepts in his own mind. To judge what tokens would best match the conceptual models of the audience. Communication is clearly a very knowledge oriented effort and has been referred to in terms of ontologies in different types of literature (Genesereth 92, Gruber 93, Hamon 96, Swartout 99) Ontologies can be defined as a structure of tokens that portrays a mental model. The TEKMO project has focused towards shared ontologies. Those are ontologies that are communal and which we claim to be a prerequisite for real communication. The basic philosophy ....

Genesereth and Fikes. Knowledge Interchange Format. Version 3.0 of Reference Manual Logic Group, Report Logic-92-1, Computer Science Department, Stanford University. 1992

No context found.

M. R. Genesereth and R. E. Fikes. Knowledge Interchange Format, Version 3.0 Reference Manual. Technical Report Logic-92-1, Stanford, CA, USA, 1992.

No context found.

M. R. Genesereth and R. E. Fikes. Knowledge Interchange Format, Version 3.0 Reference Manual. Technical Report Logic-921, Stanford, CA, USA, 1992.

No context found.

M.R. Genesereth. Knowledge interchange format. In Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Second International Conference, 1991.

No context found.

Genesereth, M.R., and Fikes, R. (1992), "Knowledge Interchange Format." Version 3.0 Reference Manual, Computer Science Department, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.

No context found.

Genesereth M., Fikes R., et al., Knowledge Interchange Format, version 3.0, reference manual, Technical Report, Computer Science Department, Stanford University, 1992

No context found.

Genesereth, M.R. and Fikes, R.E. (1992). Knowledge Interchange Format, Version 0.3, Reference Manual Logic-92-1, Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Stanford University.

No context found.

M. R. Genesereth and R. E. Fikes. Knowledge Interchange Format, Version 3.0 Reference Manual. Technical Report Logic-92-1, Computer Science Department, Stanford University, Stanford, US, June 1992.

No context found.

M. R. Genesereth and R. E. Fikes. Knowledge Interchange Format, Version 3.0 Reference Manual TR Logic-92-1. Technical report, Stanford University, Stanford, 1992.

No context found.

Genesereth, M.: Knowledge Interchange Format. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on the Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR-91), 1991

No context found.

M. R. Genesereth and R. E. Fikes (eds.). 1992. Knowledge Interchange Format, Version 3.0 Reference Manual. Computer Science Department, Stanford University, Technical report Logic-92-1.

No context found.

Genesereth, M., (1991). "Knowledge Interchange Format", In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on the Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, Allen, J., Fikes, R., Sandewall, E. (eds), Morgan Kaufman Publishers, pp. 238--249.

No context found.

Genesereth, M.: Knowledge Interchange Format. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on the Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR-91), 1991

No context found.

M. Genesereth and R. Fikes. Knowledge interchange format, version 3.0 reference manual. Technical Report Logic-92-1, Computer Science Department, Stanford University, 1992.

No context found.

M.R. Geneserth and R.E. Fikes. Knowledge interchange format, version 3.0. ref.man. Technical report, University of Stanford, 1992.

No context found.

Genesereth, M., Fikes , R. Knowledge Interchange Format. Technical Report. Computer Science Department. Stanford University. Logic-92-1. 1992.

No context found.

M.R. Genesereth, "Knowledge Interchange Format," Web Document, 13 September 1995 (17 May 1997), http://logic.stanford.edu/kif/specification.html

No context found.

M. Genesereth and R. Fikes. Knowledge interchange format, version 3.0 reference manual. Technical Report Logic-92-1, Computer Science Department, Stanford University, 1992.

No context found.

M. Genesereth and R. Fikes. Knowledge interchange format, version 3.0 reference manual. Technical Report Logic-92-1, Computer Science Department, Stanford University, 1992.

No context found.

M. Genesereth. "Knowledge Interchange Format," Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Second International Conference, Cambridge, MA, pages 599-600, Morgan Kaufmann, 1991.

No context found.

M. Genesereth. Knowledge interchange format. In James Allen, Richard Fikes, and Erik Sandewall, Eds., Proceedings of the Conference of the Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. 599-600. Morgan Kaufman Publishers. 1991.

No context found.

Gensereth, M.; Fikes, R.: Knowledge Interchange Format, Version 3.0 Reference Manual (1992)

No context found.

M. R. Genesereth, \Knowledge interchange format", Proceedings of the Conference of the Principle of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, 1991, pp. 599-600.

No context found.

M. R. Genesereth, "Knowledge interchange format", Proceedings of the Conference of the Principle of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, 1991, pp. 599-600.

No context found.

M. Genesereth et al., "Knowledge Interchange Format", Technical Report, Logic-90-04, Dept. of Computer Science, Stanford University, 1990.

First 50 documents  Next 50

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