Reasoning with Multi-version Ontologies: A Temporal Logic Approach

Huang, Zhisheng; Stuckenschmidt, Heiner

doi:10.1007/11574620_30

Cited by 48 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…PION is a reasoning system that deals with inconsistent ontologies 21 (Huang and Visser 2004;. MORE is a multi-version ontology reasoner 22 (Huang and Stuckenschmidt 2005). DION is a debugger of inconsistent ontologies 23 (Schlobach and Huang 2005).…”

Section: Applicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

SWI-Prolog and the web

Wielemaker¹,

Huang²,

Meij³

2008

Theory and Practice of Logic Programming

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prolog is an excellent tool for representing and manipulating data written in formal languages as well as natural language. Its safe semantics and automatic memory management make it a prime candidate for programming robust Web services.Where Prolog is commonly seen as a component in a Web application that is either embedded or communicates using a proprietary protocol, we propose an architecture where Prolog communicates to other components in a Web application using the standard HTTP protocol. By avoiding embedding in external Web servers development and deployment become much easier. To support this architecture, in addition to the transfer protocol, we must also support parsing, representing and generating the key Web document types such as HTML, XML and RDF. This paper motivates the design decisions in the libraries and extensions to Prolog for handling Web documents and protocols. The design has been guided by the requirement to handle large documents efficiently. The described libraries support a wide range of Web applications ranging from HTML and XML documents to Semantic Web RDF processing.The benefits of using Prolog for Web related tasks is illustrated using three case studies.

show abstract

Section: Applicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

SWI-Prolog and the web

Wielemaker¹,

Huang²,

Meij³

2008

Theory and Practice of Logic Programming

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This analysis requires an understanding of which version of an ontology an application is compatible with, in particular in the context of ongoing ontology development where newer versions may not be consistent. The issue of compatibility is addressed in the MORE framework for reasoning with multi-version ontologies [5] and in the work of Heflin and colleagues on declarative specifications of compatibility between versions [4].…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Framework for Ontology Evolution in Collaborative Environments

Noy

Chugh

Liu

et al. 2006

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

153

127

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. With the wider use of ontologies in the Semantic Web and as part of production systems, multiple scenarios for ontology maintenance and evolution are emerging. For example, successive ontology versions can be posted on the (Semantic) Web, with users discovering the new versions serendipitously; ontology-development in a collaborative environment can be synchronous or asynchronous; managers of projects may exercise quality control, examining changes from previous baseline versions and accepting or rejecting them before a new baseline is published, and so on. In this paper, we present different scenarios for ontology maintenance and evolution that we have encountered in our own projects and in those of our collaborators. We define several features that categorize these scenarios. For each scenario, we discuss the high-level tasks that an editing environment must support. We then present a unified comprehensive set of tools to support different scenarios in a single framework, allowing users to switch between different modes easily. Evolution of Ontology EvolutionAcceptance of ontologies as an integral part of knowledge-intensive applications has been growing steadily. The word ontology became a recognized substrate in fields outside the computer science, from bioinformatics to intelligence analysis. With such acceptance, came the use of ontologies in industrial systems and active publishing of ontologies on the (Semantic) Web. More and more often, developing an ontology is not a project undertaken by a single person or a small group of people in a research laboratory, but rather it is a large project with numerous participants, who are often geographically distributed, where the resulting ontologies are used in production environments with paying customers counting on robustness and reliability of the system.The Protégé ontology-development environment 1 has become a widely used tool for developing ontologies, with more than 50,000 registered users. The Protégé group works closely with some of the tool's users and we have a continuous stream of requests from them on the features that they would like to have supported in terms of managing and developing ontologies collaboratively. The configurations for collaborative development differ significantly however. For instance, Perot Systems 2 uses a client-server mode of Protégé with multiple users simultaneously accessing the same copy of the ontology on the server. The NCI Center for Bioinformatics, which develops the NCI The-1 http://protege.stanford.edu 2

show abstract

“…In the case where O n ∪ {α} is inconsistent, we can for example check whether the previous version can be used (PreviousVersion α) and whether there is a version at all that can be used instead (SomePriorVersion α). For the formal semantics of these operators we refer the reader to [7].…”

Section: Multi-version Reasoningmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Framework for Handling Inconsistency in Changing Ontologies

Haase

Harmelen

Huang

et al. 2005

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

Self Cite

120

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.One of the major problems of large scale, distributed and evolving ontologies is the potential introduction of inconsistencies. In this paper we survey four different approaches to handling inconsistency in DL-based ontologies: consistent ontology evolution, repairing inconsistencies, reasoning in the presence of inconsistencies and multi-version reasoning. We present a common formal basis for all of them, and use this common basis to compare these approaches. We discuss the different requirements for each of these methods, the conditions under which each of them is applicable, the knowledge requirements of the various methods, and the different usage scenarios to which they would apply.

show abstract

Reasoning with Multi-version Ontologies: A Temporal Logic Approach

Cited by 48 publications

References 10 publications

SWI-Prolog and the web

SWI-Prolog and the web

A Framework for Ontology Evolution in Collaborative Environments

A Framework for Handling Inconsistency in Changing Ontologies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About