Towards correspondences between Conceptual Graphs and Description Logics

Abstract

We present a formal correspondence between Conceptual Graphs and Description Logics. More precisely, we consider the Simple Conceptual Graphs model provided with type definitions (which we call TSC~) and the .Af~,f.O7. standard Description Logic. We prove an equivalence between a subset of TSC~ and a subset of .AEF_.OZ. Based on this equivalence, we suggest extensions of both formalisms while preserving the equivalence. In particular, regarding to standard Description Logics where a concept can be defined by the conjunction of any two concepts, we propose an extension of type definition in CGs allowing type definitions from the "conjunction" of any two types and consequently partial type definitions. Symmetrically, regarding generalization/specialization operations in Conceptual Graphs, we conclude by suggesting how Description Logics could take advantage of these correspondences to improve the explanation of subsumption computation.

A knowledge engineering approach to knowledge management

“…Both formalisms are subsumption-centered and dedicated to the representation of terminological knowledge and assertional knowledge. There are many correspondences between DLs and CGs [7,37]. Ontologies in RDF schemas can also be translated into CGs automatically [6,15].…”

Fuzzy Knowledge Management through Knowledge Engineering and Fuzzy Logic

“…Both formalisms are subsumption-centered and dedicated to the representation of terminological knowledge and assertional knowledge. There are many correspondences between DLs and CGs [6,20]. Ontologies in RDF schemas can also be translated into CGs automatically [5,11].…”

A Practical Exploration of Ontology Interoperability

“…There are three subsets of the OWL language: OWL lite, OWL DL and OWL full. OWL DL was judged to be the most appropriate level by which to investigate interoperability across the two ontology formats as it supports Description Logic (The 'DL' in OWL DL), given the previous correspondence between CG and DL [2]. In passing, OWL uses URI to identify objects it allows inter ontology transfer of data over the Web, a simple functionality that does not exist in the Amine platform at present but could easily be implemented.…”