Advertisement

A Framework for Handling Inconsistency in Changing Ontologies

  • Peter Haase
  • Frank van Harmelen
  • Zhisheng Huang
  • Heiner Stuckenschmidt
  • York Sure
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3729)

Abstract

One of the major problems of large scale, distributed and evolving ontologies is the potential introduction of inconsistencies. In this paper we survey four different approaches to handling inconsistency in DL-based ontologies: consistent ontology evolution, repairing inconsistencies, reasoning in the presence of inconsistencies and multi-version reasoning. We present a common formal basis for all of them, and use this common basis to compare these approaches. We discuss the different requirements for each of these methods, the conditions under which each of them is applicable, the knowledge requirements of the various methods, and the different usage scenarios to which they would apply.

Keywords

Description Logic Change Operation Ontology Evolution Query Answer Ontology Language 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Flouris, G.: Belief change in arbitrary logics. In: HDMS (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Haase, P., Stojanovic, L.: Consistent evolution of OWL ontologies. In: Proceedings of the Second European Semantic Web Conference, Heraklion, Greece (May 2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Heflin, J.: Towards the Semantic Web: Knowledge Representation in a Dynamic, Distributed Environment. Phd thesis, University of Maryland (2001)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Heflin, J., Pan, J.Z.: A model theoretic semantics for ontology versioning. In: Third International Semantic Web Conference, Hiroshima, Japan, pp. 62–76. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.F.: Reducing OWL Entailment to Description Logic Satisfiability. Journal of Web Semantics 1(4) (2004)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Horrocks, I., Sattler, U., Tobies, S.: Practical Reasoning for Very Expressive Description Logics. Logic Journal of the IGPL 8(3), 239–263 (2000)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Huang, Z., Stuckenschmidt, H.: Reasoning with multiversion ontologies: a temporal logic approach. In: Gil, Y., Motta, E., Benjamins, V.R., Musen, M.A. (eds.) ISWC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3729, Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Huang, Z., van Harmelen, F., ten Teije, A.: Reasoning with inconsistent ontologies. In: Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2005), pp. 254–259 (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Klein, M.: Change Management for Distributed Ontologies. Phd thesis, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    McGuinness, D., van Harmelen, F.: OWL Web Ontology Language. Recommendation, W3C (2004), http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/
  11. 11.
    Noy, N.F., Musen, M.A.: The prompt suite: Interactive tools for ontology merging and mapping. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 59(6), 983–1024 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Reiter, R.: A theory of diagnosis from first principles. Artif. Intelligence 32(1), 57–95 (1987)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schlobach, S., Cornet, R.: Non-standard reasoning services for the debugging of description logic terminologies. In: Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence - IJCAI 2003, Acapulco, Mexico. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stojanovic, L.: Methods and Tools for Ontology Evolution. Phd thesis, University of Karlsruhe (2004)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Stuckenschmidt, H., Klein, M.: Integrity and change in modular ontologies. In: Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence - IJCAI 2003, Acapulco, Mexico. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter Haase
    • 1
  • Frank van Harmelen
    • 2
  • Zhisheng Huang
    • 2
  • Heiner Stuckenschmidt
    • 2
  • York Sure
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute AIFBUniversity of KarlsruheGermany
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceVrije UniversiteitAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations