Ontologies on the semantic web

As an informational technology, the World Wide Web has enjoyed spectacular success. In just ten years it has transformed the way information is produced, stored, and shared in arenas as diverse as shopping, family photo albums, and high-level academic research. The “Semantic Web” was touted by its developers as equally revolutionary but has not yet achieved anything like the Web’s exponential uptake. This 17 000 word survey article explores why this might be so, from a perspective that bridges both philosophy and IT

Dwelling on ontology - semantic reasoning over topographic maps

The thesis builds upon the hypothesis that the spatial arrangement of topographic features, such as buildings, roads and other land cover parcels, indicates how land is used. The aim is to make this kind of high-level semantic information explicit within topographic data. There is an increasing need to share and use data for a wider range of purposes, and to make data more definitive, intelligent and accessible. Unfortunately, we still encounter a gap between low-level data representations and high-level concepts that typify human qualitative spatial reasoning. The thesis adopts an ontological approach to bridge this gap and to derive functional information by using standard reasoning mechanisms offered by logic-based knowledge representation formalisms. It formulates a framework for the processes involved in interpreting land use information from topographic maps. Land use is a high-level abstract concept, but it is also an observable fact intimately tied to geography. By decomposing this relationship, the thesis correlates a one-to-one mapping between high-level conceptualisations established from human knowledge and real world entities represented in the data. Based on a middle-out approach, it develops a conceptual model that incrementally links different levels of detail, and thereby derives coarser, more meaningful descriptions from more detailed ones. The thesis verifies its proposed ideas by implementing an ontology describing the land use ‘residential area’ in the ontology editor Protégé. By asserting knowledge about high-level concepts such as types of dwellings, urban blocks and residential districts as well as individuals that link directly to topographic features stored in the database, the reasoner successfully infers instances of the defined classes. Despite current technological limitations, ontologies are a promising way forward in the manner we handle and integrate geographic data, especially with respect to how humans conceptualise geographic space

Integrating ontologies and argumentation for decision-making in breast cancer

This thesis describes some of the problems in providing care for patients with breast cancer. These are then used to motivate the development of an extension to an existing theory of argumentation, which I call the Ontology-based Argumentation Formalism (OAF). The work is assessed in both theoretical and empirical ways. From a clinical perspective, there is a problem with the provision of care. Numerous reports have noted the failure to provide uniformly high quality care, as well as the number of deaths caused by medical care. The medical profession has responded in various ways, but one of these has been the development of Decision Support Systems (DSS). The evidence for the effectiveness of such systems is mixed, and the technical basis of such systems remains open to debate. However, one basis that has been used is argumentation. An important aspect of clinical practice is the use of the evidence from clinical trials, but these trials are based on the results in defined groups of patients. Thus when we use the results of clinical trials to reason about treatments, there are two forms of information we are interested in - the evidence from trials and the relationships between groups of patients and treatments. The relational information can be captured in an ontology about the groups of patients and treatments, and the information from the trials captured as a set of defeasible rules. OAF is an extension of an existing argumentation system, and provides the basis for an argumentation-based Knowledge Representation system which could serve as the basis for future DSS. In OAF, the ontology provides a repository of facts, both asserted and inferred on the basis of formulae in the ontology, as well as defining the language of the defeasible rules. The defeasible rules are used in a process of defeasible reasoning, where monotonic consistent chains of reasoning are used to draw plausible conclusions. This defeasible reasoning is used to generate arguments and counter-arguments. Conflict between arguments is defined in terms of inconsistent formulae in the ontology, and by using existing proposals for ontology languages we are able to make use of existing proposals and technologies for ontological reasoning. There are three substantial areas of novel work: I develop an extension to an existing argumentation formalism, and prove some simple properties of the formalism. I also provide a novel formalism of the practical syllogism and related hypothetical reasoning, and compare my approach to two other proposals in the literature. I conclude with a substantial case study based on a breast cancer guideline, and in order to do so I describe a methodology for comparing formal and informal arguments, and use the results of this to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of OAF. In order to develop the case study, I provide a prototype implementation. The prototype uses a novel incremental algorithm to construct arguments and I give soundness, completeness and time-complexity results. The final chapter of the thesis discusses some general lessons from the development of OAF and gives ideas for future work

Knowledge base ontological debugging guided by linguistic evidence

Le résumé en français n'a pas été communiqué par l'auteur.When they grow in size, knowledge bases (KBs) tend to include sets of axioms which are intuitively absurd but nonetheless logically consistent. This is particularly true of data expressed in OWL, as part of the Semantic Web framework, which favors the aggregation of set of statements from multiple sources of knowledge, with overlapping signatures.Identifying nonsense is essential if one wants to avoid undesired inferences, but the sparse usage of negation within these datasets generally prevents the detection of such cases on a strict logical basis. And even if the KB is inconsistent, identifying the axioms responsible for the nonsense remains a non trivial task. This thesis investigates the usage of automatically gathered linguistic evidence in order to detect and repair violations of common sense within such datasets. The main intuition consists in exploiting distributional similarity between named individuals of an input KB, in order to identify consequences which are unlikely to hold if the rest of the KB does. Then the repair phase consists in selecting axioms to be preferably discarded (or at least amended) in order to get rid of the nonsense. A second strategy is also presented, which consists in strengthening the input KB with a foundational ontology, in order to obtain an inconsistency, before performing a form of knowledge base debugging/revision which incorporates this linguistic input. This last step may also be applied directly to an inconsistent input KB. These propositions are evaluated with different sets of statements issued from the Linked Open Data cloud, as well as datasets of a higher quality, but which were automatically degraded for the evaluation. The results seem to indicate that distributional evidence may actually constitute a relevant common ground for deciding between conflicting axioms

Knowledge base ontological debugging guided by linguistic evidence

Le résumé en français n'a pas été communiqué par l'auteur.When they grow in size, knowledge bases (KBs) tend to include sets of axioms which are intuitively absurd but nonetheless logically consistent. This is particularly true of data expressed in OWL, as part of the Semantic Web framework, which favors the aggregation of set of statements from multiple sources of knowledge, with overlapping signatures.Identifying nonsense is essential if one wants to avoid undesired inferences, but the sparse usage of negation within these datasets generally prevents the detection of such cases on a strict logical basis. And even if the KB is inconsistent, identifying the axioms responsible for the nonsense remains a non trivial task. This thesis investigates the usage of automatically gathered linguistic evidence in order to detect and repair violations of common sense within such datasets. The main intuition consists in exploiting distributional similarity between named individuals of an input KB, in order to identify consequences which are unlikely to hold if the rest of the KB does. Then the repair phase consists in selecting axioms to be preferably discarded (or at least amended) in order to get rid of the nonsense. A second strategy is also presented, which consists in strengthening the input KB with a foundational ontology, in order to obtain an inconsistency, before performing a form of knowledge base debugging/revision which incorporates this linguistic input. This last step may also be applied directly to an inconsistent input KB. These propositions are evaluated with different sets of statements issued from the Linked Open Data cloud, as well as datasets of a higher quality, but which were automatically degraded for the evaluation. The results seem to indicate that distributional evidence may actually constitute a relevant common ground for deciding between conflicting axioms

Pseudo-contractions as Gentle Repairs

Updating a knowledge base to remove an unwanted consequence is a challenging task. Some of the original sentences must be either deleted or weakened in such a way that the sentence to be removed is no longer entailed by the resulting set. On the other hand, it is desirable that the existing knowledge be preserved as much as possible, minimising the loss of information. Several approaches to this problem can be found in the literature. In particular, when the knowledge is represented by an ontology, two different families of frameworks have been developed in the literature in the past decades with numerous ideas in common but with little interaction between the communities: applications of AGM-like Belief Change and justification-based Ontology Repair. In this paper, we investigate the relationship between pseudo-contraction operations and gentle repairs. Both aim to avoid the complete deletion of sentences when replacing them with weaker versions is enough to prevent the entailment of the unwanted formula. We show the correspondence between concepts on both sides and investigate under which conditions they are equivalent. Furthermore, we propose a unified notation for the two approaches, which might contribute to the integration of the two areas

Ontology modularization: principles and practice

Technological advances have provided us with the capability to build large intelligent systems capable of using knowledge, which relies on being able to represent the knowledge in a way that machines can process and interpret. This is achieved by using ontologies; that is logical theories that capture the knowledge of a domain. It is widely accepted that ontology development is a non-trivial task and can be expedited through the reuse of existing ontologies. However, it is likely that the developer would only require a part of the original ontology; obtaining this part is the purpose of ontology modularization. In this thesis a graph traversal based technique for performing ontology module extraction is presented. We present an extensive evaluation of the various ontology modularization techniques in the literature; including a proposal for an entropy inspired measure. A task-based evaluation is included, which demonstrates that traversal based ontology module extraction techniques have comparable performance to the logical based techniques. Agents, autonomous software components, use ontologies in complex systems; with each agent having its own, possibly different, ontology. In such systems agents need to communicate and successful communication relies on the agents ability to reach an agreement on the terms they will use to communicate. Ontology modularization allows the agents to agree on only those terms relevant to the purpose of the communication. Thus, this thesis presents a novel application of ontology modularization as a space reduction mechanism for the dynamic selection of ontology alignments in multi-agent systems. The evaluation of this novel application shows that ontology modularization can reduce the search space without adversely affecting the quality of the agreed ontology alignment

A Framework for the Organization and Discovery of Information Resources in a WWW Environment Using Association, Classification and Deduction

The Semantic Web is envisioned as a next-generation WWW environment in which information is given well-defined meaning. Although the standards for the Semantic Web are being established, it is as yet unclear how the Semantic Web will allow information resources to be effectively organized and discovered in an automated fashion. This dissertation research explores the organization and discovery of resources for the Semantic Web. It assumes that resources on the Semantic Web will be retrieved based on metadata and ontologies that will provide an effective basis for automated deduction. An integrated deduction system based on the Resource Description Framework (RDF), the DARPA Agent Markup Language (DAML) and description logic (DL) was built. A case study was conducted to study the system effectiveness in retrieving resources in a large Web resource collection. The results showed that deduction has an overall positive impact on the retrieval of the collection over the defined queries. The greatest positive impact occurred when precision was perfect with no decrease in recall. The sensitivity analysis was conducted over properties of resources, subject categories, query expressions and relevance judgment in observing their relationships with the retrieval performance. The results highlight both the potentials and various issues in applying deduction over metadata and ontologies. Further investigation will be required for additional improvement. The factors that can contribute to degraded performance were identified and addressed. Some guidelines were developed based on the lessons learned from the case study for the development of Semantic Web data and systems

Proceedings of LOAIT '07 : II Workshop on Legal Ontologies and Artificial Intelligence Techniques

Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Legal Ontologies and Artificial Intelligence Techniques June 4th, 2007, Stanford Universit