Dobór języka reprezentacji wiedzy w ontologiach dziedzinowych

• Authors: Ziemba Paweł , Jankowski Jarosław , Wolski Waldemar

Title variants

EN

Selection of knowledge representation language in the domain ontologies

• Languages of publication: PL EN

Abstracts

EN

The article discusses the problem of knowledge representation language selection for domain ontologies. In the article the use of ontology as a tool of knowledge representation was presented and the analysis of logical formalisms such as frames, logic programs, description logic, first-order logic and common logic was carried out. Then a number of classic and markup based knowledge representation languages were analysed: Ontolingua, LOOM, OCML, FLogic, SHOE, RDF(S), OWL, OWL2. Based on the analysis of literature relationships and dependencies between versions and profiles of the OWL language were systematised. The article ends with the conclusion, according to which OWL 2 DL language is the most expressive language of retaining decidability, and therefore it is characterized by the highest applicability in the construction of domain ontologies allowing inference.

Keywords

EN

knowledge representation; OWL; ontology; knowledge base

• Publisher: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu
• Journal: Informatyka Ekonomiczna
• Year: 2015
• Issue: 1(35)
• Pages: 84-100

Contributors

author

Ziemba Paweł

author

Jankowski Jarosław

author

Wolski Waldemar

References

• Abraham A., 2003, Intelligent systems: Architectures and perspectives, “Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing”, vol. 113, s. 1-35.
• Antoniou G., van Harmelen F., 2009, Web Ontology Language: OWL, [w:] S. Staab, R. Studer (red.), Handbook On Ontologies, second edition, International Handbooks on Information Systems, Springer, s. 91-110.
• Baader F., Horrocks I., Sattler U., 2009, Description Logics, [w:] S. Staab, R. Studer (red.), Handbook On Ontologies, second edition, International Handbooks on Information Systems, Springer, s. 21-43.
• Brdulak J.J., 2004, Systemy informatyczne w zarządzaniu wiedzą, “E-mentor”, nr 2, s. 48-51.
• Calvanese D., De Giacomo G., Lembo D., Lenzerini M., 2007, Tractable reasoning and efficient query answering in description logics: The DL-lite family, “Journal of Automated Reasoning”, vol. 39, no. 3, s. 385-429.
• Cardoso J., 2007, The semantic web vision: Where are we?, “IEEE Inteligent Systems”, vol. 22, no. 5, s. 84-88.
• Casellas N., 2011, Methodologies, tools and languages for ontology design, [w:] N. Casellas (red.), Legal Ontology Engineering. Methodologies, Modelling Trends, and the Ontology of Professional Judicial Knowledge, Springer, s. 57-107.
• Chaudhary D., Yadaav P.K., Singh R.K., Mitra S., Ghaziabad S., 2012, Integrated knowledge base: An approach to knowledge extraction, “International Journal of Computer Applications”, no. 6, s. 19-26.
• Corcho O., Fernandez-Lopez M., Gomez-Perez A., 2006, Ontological engineering: Principles, methods, tools and languages, [w:] C. Calero, F. Ruiz, M. Piattini (red.), Ontologies for Software Engineering and Software Technology, Springer, s. 1-48.
• Cummings L. (red.), 2005, Pragmatics: A Multidisciplinary Perspective, Edinburg University Press.
• Czarnecki A., Sitek T., 2013, Ontologies vs. rules - comparison of methods of knowledge representation based on the example of IT services management, [w:] L. Borzemski, A. Grzech, J. Świątek, Z. Wilimowska (red.), Information Systems Architecture and Technology: Intelligent Information Systems, Knowledge Discovery, Big Data and High Performance Computing, Oficyna Wydawnicza Politechniki Wrocławskiej, s. 99-109.
• De Bruijn J., 2007, Logics for the semantic Web, [w:] J. Cardoso (red.), Semantics Web Services: Theory, Tools and Applications, IGI Global, s. 24-43.
• Goczyła K. (red.), 2011, Ontologie w systemach informatycznych, Akademicka Oficyna Wydawnicza EXIT, Warszawa.
• Gomez-Perez A., Fernandez-Lopez M., Corcho O., 2004, Languages for building ontologies, [w:]
• A. Gomez-Perez, M. Fernandez-Lopez, O. Corcho (red.), Ontological Engineering, With Examples from the Areas of Knowledge Management, e-Commerce and the Semantic Web, Springer, s. 199-292.
• Grau B.C., Horrocks I., Motik B., Parsia B., Patel-Schneider P., Sattler U., 2008, OWL 2: The next step for OWL, “Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web”, vol. 6, no. 4, s. 309-322.
• Grosof B.N., Horrocks I., Volz R., Decker S., 2003, Description Logic Programs: Combining
• Logic Programs with Description Logic, Proceedings of the 12th international conference on World Wide Web, ACM, s. 48-57.
• Gruber T.R., 1993, A translation approach to portable ontology specifications, “Knowledge Acquisition”, vol. 5, no. 2, s. 199-220.
• Gruninger M., Lee J., 2002, Ontology applications and design, “Communications of the ACM”, vol. 45, no. 2, s. 39-41.
• Guarino N., Oberle D., Staab S., 2009, What is an ontology?, [w:] S. Staab, R. Studer (red.), Handbook on Ontologies, second edition, International Handbooks on Information Systems, Springer, s. 1-17.
• Guzman-Arenas A., Cuevas A.D., 2010, Knowledge accumulation through automatic merging of ontologies, “Expert Systems with Applications”, vol. 37, no. 3, s. 1991-2005.
• Hartley R.T., 1985, Representation of Procedural Knowledge for Expert Systems, IEEE 2nd. Conf. on AI Applications.
• Hirst G., 1992, Semantic Interpretation and the Resolution of Ambiguity, Cambridge University Press.
• ISO/IEC 24707:2007(E), 2007, Information technology – Common Logic (CL): A Framework for a Family of Logic-based Languages.
• Knorr M., Alferes J.J., Hitzler P., 2011, Local closed world reasoning with description logics under the well-founded semantics, “Artificial Intelligence”, vol. 175, no. 9-10, s. 1528-1554.
• Koide S., Takeda H., 2011, Common languages for web semantics, [w:] L.A. Maciaszek, P. Loucopoulos (red.), Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering, Springer, s. 148-162.
• Kutsia T., Marin M., 2012, Solving, Reasoning, and Programming in Common Logic, Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium on Symbolic and Numeric Algorithms for Scientific Computing (SYNASC), IEEE, s. 119-126.
• Łabuzek M., 2003, Wykorzystanie metamodelowania do specyfikacji ontologii znaczenia opisów rzeczywistości, E-informatyka.pl, http://www.e-informatyka.pl/attach/ Wykorzystanie_meta-modelowania_do_specyfikacji_ontologii_znaczenia_opisów_rzeczywistości/402.pdf (21.03.2015).
• Nebel B., 2001, Frame-based systems, [w:] R.A. Wilson, F. Keil (red.), The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences (MITECS), MIT Press, s. 324-326.
• O’Connor M., Knublauch H., Tu S., Grosof B., Dean M., Grosso W., Musen M., 2005, Supporting rule system interoperability on the semantic Web with SWRL, “Lecture Notes in Computer Science”, vol. 3729, s. 974-986.
• Rao A.R., Jain R., 1988, Knowledge representation and control in computer vision systems, “IEEE Expert”, vol. 3 , no. 1, s. 64-79.
• Roussey C., Pinet F., Kang M.A., Corcho O., 2011, An introduction to ontologies and ontology engineering, [w:] G. Falquet, C. Metral, J. Teller, C. Tweed (red.), Ontologies in Urban Development Projects, Springer, s. 9-38.
• Roy B., 1996, Multicriteria Methodology for Decision Aiding, Springer, Dordrecht.
• Saa R., Garcia A., Gomez C., Carretero J., Garcia-Carballeira F., 2012, An ontology-driven decision support system for high-performance and cost-optimized design of complex railway portal frames, “Expert Systems with Applications”, vol. 39, no. 10, s. 8784-8792.
• Shiau W.L., 2011, A profile of information systems research published in expert systems with applications from 1995 to 2008, “Expert Systems with Applications”, vol. 38, no. 4, s. 3999-4005.
• Shue L.Y., Chen C.W., Shiue W., 2009, The development of an ontology-based expert system for corporate financial rating, “Expert Systems with Applications”, vol. 36, no. 2, s. 2130-2142.
• Tripathi K.P., 2011, Artificial intelligence techniques - Novel approaches & practical applications, “International Journal of Computer Applications”, no. 4, s. 19-23.
• Truemper K. (red.), 2004, Design of Logic-based Intelligent Systems, Wiley-Interscience, Hoboken.
• Uschold M., Gruninger M., 2004, Ontologies and semantics for seamless connectivity, “SIGMOD Record”, vol. 33, no. 4, s. 58-64.
• Villanueva-Rosales N., Dumontier M., 2008, yOWL: An ontology-driven knowledge base for yeast biologists, “Journal of Biomedical Informatics”, vol. 41, no. 5, s. 779-789.
• W3C OWL Working Group, 2012, OWL 2 Web Ontology Language, Document Overview (Second Edition), http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-overview (24.03.2015).
• Waloszek A. (red.), 2010, Hierarchiczna kontekstualizacja baz wiedzy, rozprawa doktorska, Politechnika Gdańska.
• Waloszek W. (red.), 2007, Metody strukturalnej analizy ontologii opartych na logice opisowej, rozprawa doktorska, Politechnika Gdańska.
• Wang H.H., Noy N., Rector A., Musen M., Redmont T., Rubin D., Tu S., Tudorache T., Drummond N., Horridge M., Seidenberg J., 2006, Frames and OWL Side by Side, Proceedings of the 9th international Protégé conference, s. 54-57.
• Wong B.K., Monaco J.A., 1995, Expert system applications in business: A review and analysis of the literature (1977-1993), “Information & Management”, vol. 29, no. 3, s. 141-152.
• Wu Z., Chen H. (red.), 2008, Semantic Grid: Model, Methodology, and Applications, Springer.
• Yu L., 2011, OWL: Web ontology language, [w:] L. Yu (red.), A Developer’s Guide to the Semantic Web, Springer, s. 155-239.
• Zhu L., Yang Q., Chen W., 2009, Research on Ontology Integration Combined with Machine Learning, Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Intelligent Computation Technology and Automation, IEEE, vol. 1, s. 464-467.