Advertisement

A Rigorous Approach to Knowledge Base Maintenance

  • John Debenham
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2718)

Abstract

A knowledge base is maintained by modifying its conceptual model and by using those modifications to specify changes to its implementation. The maintenance problem is to determine which parts of that model should be checked for correctness in response a change in the application. The maintenance problem is not computable for first-order knowledge bases. Two things in the conceptual model are joined by a maintenance link if a modification to one of them means that the other must be checked for correctness, and so possibly modified, if consistency of the model is to be preserved. In a unified conceptual model for first-order knowledge bases the data and knowledge are modelled formally in a uniform way. A characterisation is given of four different kinds of maintenance links in a unified conceptual model. Two of these four kinds of maintenance links can be removed by transforming the conceptual model. In this way the maintenance problem is simplified.

Keywords

KBS methodology expert systems intelligent systems 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Mayol, E. and Teniente, E. (1999). “Addressing Efficiency Issues During the Process of Integrity Maintenance” in proceedings Tenth International Conference DEXA99, Florence, September 1999, pp270–281.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Debenham, J.K. (1998). “Knowledge Engineering”, Springer-Verlag, 1998.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Katsuno, H. and Mendelzon, A.O. (1991). “On the Difference between Updating a Knowledge Base and Revising It”, in proceedings Second International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, KR’91, Morgan Kaufmann, 1991.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Barr, V. (1999). “Applying Reliability Engineering to Expert Systems” in proceedings 12th International FLAIRS Conference, Florida, May 1999, pp494–498.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Jantke, K.P. and Herrmann, J. (1999). “Lattices of Knowledge in Intelligent Systems Validation” in proceedings 12th International FLAIRS Conference, Florida, May 1999, pp499–505.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Darwiche, A. (1999). “Compiling Knowledge into Decomposable Negation Normal Form” in proceedings International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI’99, Stockholm, Sweden, August 1999, pp 284–289.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Debenham, J.K. (1999). “Knowledge Object Decomposition” in proceedings 12th International FLAIRS Conference, Florida, May 1999, pp203–207.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Johnson, G. and Santos, E. (2000). “Generalizing Knowledge Representation Rules for Acquiring and Validating Uncertain Knowledge” in proceedings 13th International FLAIRS Conference, Florida, May 2000, pp186–2191.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Ramirez, J. and de Antonio, A. (2000). “Semantic Verification of Rule-Based Systems with Arithmetic Constraints” in proceedings 11th International Conference DEXA2000, London, September 2000, pp437–446.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Debenham, J.K. “The Degradation of Knowledge Base Integrity”, in proceedings 13th International FLAIRS Conference FLAIRS-2000, Orlando, Florida, May 2000, pp113–117.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • John Debenham
    • 1
  1. 1.University of TechnologySydney

Personalised recommendations