Knowledge formalization in experience feedback processes : an ontology-based approach

Because of the current trend of integration and interoperability of industrial systems, their size and complexity continue to grow making it more difficult to analyze, to understand and to solve the problems that happen in their organizations. Continuous improvement methodologies are powerful tools in order to understand and to solve problems, to control the effects of changes and finally to capitalize knowledge about changes and improvements. These tools involve suitably represent knowledge relating to the concerned system. Consequently, knowledge management (KM) is an increasingly important source of competitive advantage for organizations. Particularly, the capitalization and sharing of knowledge resulting from experience feedback are elements which play an essential role in the continuous improvement of industrial activities. In this paper, the contribution deals with semantic interoperability and relates to the structuring and the formalization of an experience feedback (EF) process aiming at transforming information or understanding gained by experience into explicit knowledge. The reuse of such knowledge has proved to have significant impact on achieving themissions of companies. However, the means of describing the knowledge objects of an experience generally remain informal. Based on an experience feedback process model and conceptual graphs, this paper takes domain ontology as a framework for the clarification of explicit knowledge and know-how, the aim of which is to get lessons learned descriptions that are significant, correct and applicable

Negative Statements Considered Useful

Knowledge bases (KBs), pragmatic collections of knowledge about notable entities, are an important asset in applications such as search, question answering and dialogue. Rooted in a long tradition in knowledge representation, all popular KBs only store positive information, while they abstain from taking any stance towards statements not contained in them. In this paper, we make the case for explicitly stating interesting statements which are not true. Negative statements would be important to overcome current limitations of question answering, yet due to their potential abundance, any effort towards compiling them needs a tight coupling with ranking. We introduce two approaches towards compiling negative statements. (i) In peer-based statistical inferences, we compare entities with highly related entities in order to derive potential negative statements, which we then rank using supervised and unsupervised features. (ii) In query-log-based text extraction, we use a pattern-based approach for harvesting search engine query logs. Experimental results show that both approaches hold promising and complementary potential. Along with this paper, we publish the first datasets on interesting negative information, containing over 1.1M statements for 100K popular Wikidata entities

Thinking outside the graph: scholarly knowledge graph construction leveraging natural language processing

Despite improved digital access to scholarly knowledge in recent decades, scholarly communication remains exclusively document-based. The document-oriented workflows in science publication have reached the limits of adequacy as highlighted by recent discussions on the increasing proliferation of scientific literature, the deficiency of peer-review and the reproducibility crisis. In this form, scientific knowledge remains locked in representations that are inadequate for machine processing. As long as scholarly communication remains in this form, we cannot take advantage of all the advancements taking place in machine learning and natural language processing techniques. Such techniques would facilitate the transformation from pure text based into (semi-)structured semantic descriptions that are interlinked in a collection of big federated graphs. We are in dire need for a new age of semantically enabled infrastructure adept at storing, manipulating, and querying scholarly knowledge. Equally important is a suite of machine assistance tools designed to populate, curate, and explore the resulting scholarly knowledge graph. In this thesis, we address the issue of constructing a scholarly knowledge graph using natural language processing techniques. First, we tackle the issue of developing a scholarly knowledge graph for structured scholarly communication, that can be populated and constructed automatically. We co-design and co-implement the Open Research Knowledge Graph (ORKG), an infrastructure capable of modeling, storing, and automatically curating scholarly communications. Then, we propose a method to automatically extract information into knowledge graphs. With Plumber, we create a framework to dynamically compose open information extraction pipelines based on the input text. Such pipelines are composed from community-created information extraction components in an effort to consolidate individual research contributions under one umbrella. We further present MORTY as a more targeted approach that leverages automatic text summarization to create from the scholarly article's text structured summaries containing all required information. In contrast to the pipeline approach, MORTY only extracts the information it is instructed to, making it a more valuable tool for various curation and contribution use cases. Moreover, we study the problem of knowledge graph completion. exBERT is able to perform knowledge graph completion tasks such as relation and entity prediction tasks on scholarly knowledge graphs by means of textual triple classification. Lastly, we use the structured descriptions collected from manual and automated sources alike with a question answering approach that builds on the machine-actionable descriptions in the ORKG. We propose JarvisQA, a question answering interface operating on tabular views of scholarly knowledge graphs i.e., ORKG comparisons. JarvisQA is able to answer a variety of natural language questions, and retrieve complex answers on pre-selected sub-graphs. These contributions are key in the broader agenda of studying the feasibility of natural language processing methods on scholarly knowledge graphs, and lays the foundation of which methods can be used on which cases. Our work indicates what are the challenges and issues with automatically constructing scholarly knowledge graphs, and opens up future research directions

The use of data-mining for the automatic formation of tactics

This paper discusses the usse of data-mining for the automatic formation of tactics. It was presented at the Workshop on Computer-Supported Mathematical Theory Development held at IJCAR in 2004. The aim of this project is to evaluate the applicability of data-mining techniques to the automatic formation of tactics from large corpuses of proofs. We data-mine information from large proof corpuses to find commonly occurring patterns. These patterns are then evolved into tactics using genetic programming techniques

Redundancy, Deduction Schemes, and Minimum-Size Bases for Association Rules

Association rules are among the most widely employed data analysis methods in the field of Data Mining. An association rule is a form of partial implication between two sets of binary variables. In the most common approach, association rules are parameterized by a lower bound on their confidence, which is the empirical conditional probability of their consequent given the antecedent, and/or by some other parameter bounds such as "support" or deviation from independence. We study here notions of redundancy among association rules from a fundamental perspective. We see each transaction in a dataset as an interpretation (or model) in the propositional logic sense, and consider existing notions of redundancy, that is, of logical entailment, among association rules, of the form "any dataset in which this first rule holds must obey also that second rule, therefore the second is redundant". We discuss several existing alternative definitions of redundancy between association rules and provide new characterizations and relationships among them. We show that the main alternatives we discuss correspond actually to just two variants, which differ in the treatment of full-confidence implications. For each of these two notions of redundancy, we provide a sound and complete deduction calculus, and we show how to construct complete bases (that is, axiomatizations) of absolutely minimum size in terms of the number of rules. We explore finally an approach to redundancy with respect to several association rules, and fully characterize its simplest case of two partial premises.Comment: LMCS accepted pape