Neural Computing & Applications

, Volume 12, Issue 3–4, pp 129–141 | Cite as

“Reasonable” support to knowledge sharing through schema analysis and articulation

Original Article

Abstract

We propose a disciplined approach to domain schema sharing which enhances the role and the extent of semantic reasoning in the semi-automated support to knowledge sharing. We introduce a formal, class-centred, entity-relationship knowledge model based on a description logic (DL). In this way, we benefit from the specialised reasoning services available in DL-based inferential engines. This approach combines logic deductions with heuristic and linguistic inferences to propose a semantic articulation of overlapping components in conceptual schemas. This approach to knowledge sharing has been implemented as a support functionality in our intelligent knowledge management environment EER-ConcepTool.

Keywords

Ontologies Sharing Reuse Articulation Automated Reasoning 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by the British Engineering & Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) under grant GR/R10127/01 (Developing an Intelligent Management Environment for Reasoning about Conceptual Domain Knowledge) and under the Interdisciplinary Research Collaboration in Advanced Knowledge Technologies (AKT) grant GR/N15764.

References

  1. 1.
    Bechhofer S et al. (2001) OilEd: a reason-able ontology editor for the semantic web. In: Proceedings of the Joint German/Austrian Conference on Artificial Intelligence (KI’2001), number 2174 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 396– 408, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beneventano D et al. (2001) The MOMIS approach to information integration. In: Proceedings of the IEEE and AAAI International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS’01), Setubal, Portugal, April 2001Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Compatangelo E, Donini FM, and Rumolo G (1999) Engineering of KR-based support systems for conceptual modelling and analysis. In: Kangassalo H, Ohsuga S and Jaakkola H (eds) Information Modelling and Knowledge Bases X, pages 115–131, IOS Press, Amsterdam, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Compatangelo E, Meisel H (2002) K-ShaRe: an architecture for sharing heterogeneous conceptualisations. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Knowledge-Based Intelligent Information & Engineering Systems (KES’2002), pages 1439–1443, IOS Press, Amsterdam, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Franconi E, Ng G (2000) The i·com tool for intelligent conceptual modelling. In: Proceedings of the 7th InternationalWorkshop on Knowledge Representation Meets Databases (KRDB’00), Berlin, Germany, August 2000Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Friedman Noy N, Musen MA (2000) PROMPT: algorithm and tool for automated ontology merging and alignment. In: Proceedings of the 17th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI’00), Austin, TX, 30 July-3 August 2000Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Garcia-Molina H et al. (1995) Integrating and accessing heterogeneous information sources in TSIMMIS. In: Proceedings of the AAAI Symposium on Information Gathering, pages 61–64, Stanford, CA, March 1995Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Genesereth MR, Keller AM and Duschka OM (1997) Infomaster: an information integration system. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD Conference, pages 539–542, Tucson, AZ, 13–15 May 1997Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Horrocks I, Sattler U and Tobies S (1999) Practical reasoning for expressive description logics. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Logic for Programming and Automated Reasoning (LPAR’99), pages 161–180, number 1705 in Lecture Notes In Artificial Intelligence, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kalfoglou Y, Schorlemmer M (2003) Ontology mapping: the state of the art. The Knowledge Engineering Review 18(1), pages 1–31Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Levy A (1998) The information manifold approach to data integration. Intelligent Systems, pages 1312–1316Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Maedcke A et al. (2002) MAFRA—a MApping FRAmework for distributed ontologies. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management (EKAW’2002), pages 235–250, volume 2473 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Miller GA (1995) WordNet: a lexical database for English. Comm ACM 38(11):39–41CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mitra P, Wiederhold G and Kersten ML (2000) A graph-oriented model for the articulation of ontology interdependencies. In: Proceedings of the Seventh Conference on Extending Database Technology (EDBT’2000), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 86–100, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Neches R et al. (1991) Enabling technology for knowledge sharing. AI Magazine 12(3):36–56Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computing ScienceUniversity of AberdeenUK

Personalised recommendations