Brachman, R. J. (1979). On the epistemological status of semantic networks. In: Findler, N. V. (Ed.), Associative Networks. Academic Press, New York, 3-50.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....of word meanings [Quill]an 68] semantic networks have also been used to model proposi tions, events, spatial relationships and so on. Since semantic networks failed in providing a unique semantic interpretation, several researchers examined the semantics of semantic networks ( Woods 751, Brachman 79] Another approach is to organize knowledge in chunks called frames [Minsky 75] which are used to represent stereotypical situations . Frames typically allow the specification of default slot values, perspectives and attached procedures. Collections of frames can be combined to frame systems. ....

.... the frame theory, have influenced the structural inheritance networks and the subsequent implementations (KL ONE, BrachmanSchmolze 85] The basic idea is to postulate a level of knowledge repre sentation with knowledge structuring primitives, rather than particular knowledge prim itives ( Brachman 79] the so called epistemological level. The basic bulldung blocks of KL ONE representations are concepts , i.e. structured conceptual objects. Roles are possible relationships between two concepts. The subsumption relation organizes the concepts in a concept taxonomy. Concepts are described ....

R. Brachman. On the Epistemological Status of Semantic Networks. In N. V. Findlet (Ed.), Associative Networks - The Representation and Use of Knowl- 74 edge by Computers. Academic Press, New York, 1979. Also BBN Report 3807, April 1978.

....responsibility and possession are not included but can be found in Sathi and Fox [35] The paper begins with an example from project management. Next, the foundation on which the theory is built, is described. This foundation is a layered representation based upon the view described by Brachman [5]. The two main parts of the theory are then described: representation of states, activities and goals; and the representation of time and causality. Finally, we provide a discussion of the relational abstraction. Let us use an example to explain the issues involved in the semantics of project ....

....concepts and the semantic definition of activities, objects and agents. The addition of a new domain only requires the addition of domain specific concepts and their definition in terms of the epistemological and semantic layers. 2For a good review o the previous work, please refer to t3rachman [5]. The semantic layer contributes to the depth of representation by facilitating inheritance of the underlying common knowledge. For example, all types of activities, whether design or verification, engineering or manufacturing, share common information such as cost, duration, and responsibility. ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Brachman, RJ. On the Epistemological Status of Semantic Networks. In NV Findler, Ed., Associative Networks: Representation and Use of Know/edge by Computers, Academic Press, New York, NY, 1979, pp. 3-50.

....used widely in artificial intelligence for natural language processing and knowledge representation, and are discussed in numer leportment FIGURE 14. A Higraph Based Version of Figure 13 FIGURE 13. Another E R Diagram (taken from ous books and papers. A good survey and history ap pears in [4], and more examples can be found in [6] 37] 44] and [50] and in the collection of papers in [17] Semantic networks can actually be thought of as concept relationship diagrams, with much of the research in the area concerned with the association of rich se mantic meaning with the various ....

Brachman. R.]. On the epistemological status of semantic networks. In Associative Networks: Representation and Use of Knowledge by Com- puter. N.V. Findlee, Ed. Academic Press. New York, 1979, pp. 3-50.

....for domain specific languages for free. The expressive power of the logics used in the former mentioned systems is well understood and several semantics are defined (for an overview see e.g. BrD96] Llo87] Describing this approach using Brachmans stratification for knowledge representations [Bra79], the implementation level are data structures and algorithms used in the deductive database or logic programming system, the logic level is Horn logic with negation, and the epistemological level realizes adequate domain dependent representation primitives through compilation to the lower levels. ....

Brachman R. J., "On the Epistemological Status of Semantic Networks", in Associative Networks': Representations and Use of Knowledge by Computers, Findler, N.V: Academic Press, 1979, pp. 3-50.

....and indefinite descriptors for an object. Definite descriptors, like the bottle of Barolo in the rack, are meant to refer to one specific object with given properties, while indefinite descriptors, like a closed bottle of Barolo are meant to refer to an arbitrary object in a specific class [23, 8]. These different types of descriptors clearly require different types of matching mechanisms, and they involve different failure conditions. Second, the content of the descriptor must depend on the characteristics of the perceptual apparatus available to the agent. As an example, if your friend ....

R. J. Brachman. On the epistemological status of semantic networks. In R. J. Brachman and H. J. Levesque, editors, Readings in Knowledge Representation, pages 191--215. Kaufmann, Los Altos, CA, 1985.

....problem, which is ultimately rooted in the utility problem, has lead us to abandon the re use approach argued for in this section. 3. 4 Terminological KR Languages By a terminological knowledge representation language we mean any formalism for defining and reasoning about concepts in the mould of [Brachman, 1979] and kl one [Brachman and Schmolze, 1985] Such systems are of little direct relevance here as there has not been a comprehensive attempt to represent capability knowledge in such a formalism. That is not to say that it is not possible though. The reason why we want to mention these languages here ....

Ronald J. Brachman. On the epistemological status of semantic networks. In Nicholas V. Findler, editor, Associative Networks, pages 3--50. Academic Press, New York, NY, 1979.

....by natural language utterances at the surface level, although a symbolic language, BRL [51] has also been developed for this purpose. It was pointed out that many frame or semantic network based systems embodied an illdefined set of constraints on what could be represented in logical languages [67, 15], and as the processing power of computers increased such restrictions became less useful. The emphasis returned to the semantics of logical languages, with the development of explicit formalisms for representing the state of a problem solver. Hewitt s PLANNER [71] covered a lot of ground in this ....

Ronald J. Brachman. On the epistemological status of semantic networks. In N. V. Findler, editor, Associative Networks: Representation and Use of Knowledge by Computers, pages 3--50. Academic Press, New York, 1979. 161

....agencies of the public administration (G2G) in the relationship with business organizations (G2B and B2G) as well as in the relation to the citizens (C2G) On the side of semantic reconciliation, the possibility of using a domain ontology is emerging as a promising solution. An ontology [1,14] is a representation of a shared conceptualization of a particular domain. Such a common conceptualization is necessary for every communication process. Explicitly considering ontologies allows to reason about sameness as well as differentness of concepts and allows to derive mappings for ....

....generally in natural language. Then we have the set of concepts B, Pa, S, Pr, R related to c as reported above. Conceptual relations play a key role since they allow concepts to be interlinked according to their semantics. The set of concepts, together with their links, forms a semantic network [1]. In Fig. 1 we provide an example of a concept structured according to OPAL follows. Fisherman Def: someone who has the license to fish on rivers and lakes of the County Kind: Actor Broader: sportsman, citizen PartOf: fishing club Similar: scubadiver [0.6] Predication: identity info, ....

R.J. Brachman; "On the epistemological status of semantic networks"; in "AssociativeNetworks - Representation and use of Knowledge by Computers", N.V.Findler (Ed.);Academic Press, New York, 1979.

....intersection area class no longer existed since the concept Pancreatin was now included in Chemical Area (Figure 11) 5 OODBs versus Description Logics A number of approaches to medical terminologies are based on the use of Description Logics. Description Logics are close descendants of KL ONE [39, 40, 41] which is itself a descendant of Quillian s original semantic network [42] Quite a number of KL ONE descendants exist, which makes this probably the largest and most successful family of implemented knowledge representation systems. Two excellent overviews are [43, 44] while some of the family ....

....of Quillian s original semantic network [42] Quite a number of KL ONE descendants exist, which makes this probably the largest and most successful family of implemented knowledge representation systems. Two excellent overviews are [43, 44] while some of the family members are described in [45, 40, 46, 47, 48] [49, 50] 51, 52, 53, 54] 55] Several other semantic networks that do not belong to the family of Description Logics exist, such as those described in [56, 57] Our own choice of using Object Oriented Databases instead of Description Logics is based on two kinds of reasons, which may be ....

Brachman RJ. On the epistemological status of semantic networks. In Findler N, editor, Associative Networks 1979;3--50, Academic Press, New York, NY, 1979.

....This research was also partially supported by two grants from the New Jersey Commission for Science and Technology, one for the New Jersey Center for Software Engineering and the other for the Multi lifecycle Engineering Research Center. 1 [6] References to related work on semantic networks [4], knowledge representation languages [22] and ontologies [24] can be found in [19, 20] One major aspect of many CVs is their enormous size and scope. A CV can easily consist of many thousands of concepts with a proportional number of inter concept relationships. Given this fact, it may be hard ....

R. J. Brachman. On the epistemological status of semantic networks. In N. V. Findler, editor, Associative Networks: Representation and Use of Knowledge by Computers, pages 3--50. Academic Press, Inc., New York, NY, 1979.

....networks and inference over semantic networks are important aspects of the knowledge base. A proper segmentation of a knowledge base and useful macro constructions used in the knowledge representation formalisms are of a decisive importance from the point of view of their expressive power [4]. This is the 9 reason why we once more accent that the concept of heterogeneous multilayered semantic network and the mechanisms of abstraction and subnetwork activation are key aspects of our model. We will discuss reading and writing, two complex actions composed from more basic operations on ....

Brachman, R.J. (1979), On the Epistemological Status of Semantic Networks, in Associative Networks: Representation and Use of Knowledge by Computers, 3-50, ed. by N.V.Findler, New York, Academic Press. 24

....proximity CHAPTER 5. THE DOMAIN KNOWLEDGE BASE 53 or adjacency relations, consequence or causality relations and precedence relations. Since Quillian s model, there have been many systems which use semantic networks as a knowledge representation formalism, such as KR systems in the KL ONE family [Brachmann 79, MacGregor 91] conceptual dependency [Schank 72] propositional semantic networks [Maida Shapiro 85, Shapiro 91] and conceptual graphs [Sowa 84, Sowa 91] Every system has its own version of a semantic network formalism but, as Brachmann points out in [Brachmann 79] one thing that we can find ....

.... systems in the KL ONE family [Brachmann 79, MacGregor 91] conceptual dependency [Schank 72] propositional semantic networks [Maida Shapiro 85, Shapiro 91] and conceptual graphs [Sowa 84, Sowa 91] Every system has its own version of a semantic network formalism but, as Brachmann points out in [Brachmann 79] one thing that we can find in common among all is their connectivity, i.e. nodes and links. Therefore, the most important issue in the semantic network representation lies in the structural decomposition of concepts to find a semantic network notation suitable for given tasks. When one devises ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Ronald J. Brachmann. On the epistemological status of semantic networks. In Nicholas V. Findler, editor, Associative networks: Representation and use of knowledge by computers. Academic Press, 1979.

....example, in many frame systems, instances are used as multiple copies of a class frame, with each instance sharing the attributes of the class, but differing in attribute values. In addition, hierarchical frame based representations are object oriented and modular 4 (Bobrow and Stefik, 1986; Brachman, 1979; Brachman, Fikes and Levesque, 1983; Levesque and Brachman, 1984; Stefik and Bobrow, 1986) This paper describes the methods we use to predict enzyme action in our knowledge based simulation. The prediction of enzyme action is the first step in the development of a system that simulates entire ....

Brachman, R. J. (1979) On the epistemological status of semantic networks. In Associative Networks: Representation and Use of Knowledge by Computers.

.... language, semantic data modelling, subsumption, type constructor, restructuring 1 Introduction The notion of term subsumption languages (TSLs) was introduced by Peter Patel Schneider in 1989 to refer to all kinds of knowledge representation systems based on Brachman s original idea of KL ONE [5]. Systems such as KRYPTON [6] BACK [8] and CLASSIC [4] have emerged from this idea. These systems generalize both semantic networks and frames. Moreover, they embody a formal term description language together with a model theoretic semantics. In general TSLs distinguish between a terminological ....

....within a schemadeclaration. If S is a schema, let F(S) denote the set of role names occurring in S. 2.2 Relation to IFO and TSLs An IFO schema S such that for all de ned types in S the structure declaration part is empty is in fact a (simple) TSL schema. Hence the basic features of TSLs [5] are representable in IFO . Moreover, the derived types of an IFO schema [1] are also directly representable in IFO . This can be achieved if we omit all role declarations. In addition, the only allowed supertype is ANY and this may only occur within the declaration of primitive types. A ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

R. Brachman. On the epistemological status of semantic networks. In N.V. Findler, editor, Associative Networks. Academic Press, New York, 1979.

.... evident when modeling software systems (or any abstract domain) where objects in one domain are themselves representations for objects in other domains [Welty93] In some sense, modeling using multiple universes of discourse can be likened to the representation levels of semantic networks [Brachman79]. Each universe, or level, is built on objects in the previous universe. Figure 12 shows a domain model used for modeling software systems which requires three distinct universes of discourse: the universe of FIGURE 12. Modeling software systems. software objects, U s ; the universe of ....

Brachman, R. and Levesque, H. On The Epistemological Status of Semantic Networks. In Brachman, R. and Levesque, H., eds.,Readings in Knowledge Representation, pp 169-189. Morgan Kaufman, 1985.

....set of beliefs for a rational agent. Such a set of beliefs expressed in some representation language is what is typically meant by the term knowledge base. The logic oriented (knowledge level) view has helped to clarify and settle many debates that were going on up to the late seventies (Brachman, 1979). For example, different ways of describing knowledge such as semantic networks, frames structures, slot assertion notation, and slotand filler notation were found to be notational variants with respect to what can be expressed and what can be inferred (Charniak McDermott, 1985) The prominence ....

Brachman, R.J. (1979). On the epistemological status of semantic networks. In N.V. Findler (ed.): Associative Networks: Representation and Use of Knowledge by Computers (pp.3-50). New York: Academic Press.

....Diagrams from Structured analysis [MARCO78] approaches can be used as logical models in the process perspective. Characteristic for constraints at the conceptual level is that they abstract from any particular logical realization, while concentrating on the (essential [DIETZ91] epistemological [BRAC79] aspects which are common to all logical realizations [GR82] Lacking of rigorous mathematical grounds of conceptual engineering (Fig.1) ANBUSO91] force to solve different problems of it in more complicated way at the lower levels. It is notable in the field of database research [GM78] ....

Brachman R. On the Epistemological Status of Semantic Networks. -- In: Associative Networks -- Academic Press, 1979, -- pp. 3--50.

....cluster concepts in different ways the cluster hierarchy permits the co existence of heterogeneous (sibling) ontologies. The proposed structure of multiple shared ontologies is based on inheritance mechanisms. Anomalies can arise from the use of inheritance, as illustrated in the literature ([1] and [15] This paper analyses how inheritance problems can affect ontologies and proposes a methodology to deal, in a semi automatic fashion, with the conflicts caused by the use of inheritance mechanisms, following the approach proposed by Goldszmidt and Pearl [6] The proposal is to represent ....

....in order to give the inheriting class, known as sub class, a more restrictive definition than that provided by the parent concept. Furthermore other properties can be added to form more specialised concepts. Anomalies arising from inheritance mechanisms have been illustrated in the literature ([1] and [15] where a distinction is made between single inheritance and multiple inheritance. The former permits a concept to inherit properties from one parent only and can cause default conflicts while the latter permits a concept to inherit properties from more than one parent and can cause ....

R.J. Brachman, `On the epistemological status of semantic networks', in Readings in Knowledge Representation, eds., R.J. Brachman and H.J. Levesque, 191--215, Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos, CA, (1985).

....Importantly, users can build up complex expressions in a gradual way, and because the meaning of each primitive is clear, translation into English is straightforward. In the literature, there is plenty of discussion about various levels, including implementation, logical, epistemological, etc. [3]. 10] discusses an ontological level. Our approach is similar; where we differ is that our higher levels are formally represented, and furthermore, there are formal links connecting them that represent simplifications and assumptions that have been made. The cost of our approach is that the ....

R.J. Brachman. On the epistemological status of semantic networks. In N.V. Findler, editor, Associative Networks: Representation and Use of Knowledge by Computers. Academic Press, 1979.

No context found.

Brachman, R. J. (1979). On the epistemological status of semantic networks. In: Findler, N. V. (Ed.), Associative Networks. Academic Press, New York, 3-50.

No context found.

Ronald J. Brachman. On the epistemological status of semantic networks. In N. V. Findler, editor, Associative Networks: Representation and Use of Knowledge by Computers, pages 3--50. Academic Press, New York, NY, 1979.

No context found.

R. Brachman. On the epistemological status of semantic networks. In N. Findler, editor, Associative Networks: Representation and Use of Knowledge by Computers, pages 3-50. Academic Press, 1979.

No context found.

Brachman, R. J., "On the Epistemological Sta- tus of Semantic Networks." In Associative Net- works: Representation and Use of Knowledge by Computers, pp. 3-50. Edited by N. V. Findlet, New York NY (1979).

No context found.

R.J. Brachman, "On the Epistemological Status of Semantic Networks," in Associative Networks: Representations and Use of Knowledge by Computers, N.V. Findler, ed., Academic Press, 1979, pp. 3-50.

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