A Cartesian Closed Category of Approximable Concept Structures

  • Pascal Hitzler
  • Guo-Qiang Zhang
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3127)


Infinite contexts and their corresponding lattices are of theoretical and practical interest since they may offer connections with and insights from other mathematical structures which are normally not restricted to the finite cases. In this paper we establish a systematic connection between formal concept analysis and domain theory as a categorical equivalence, enriching the link between the two areas as outlined in [25]. Building on a new notion of approximable concept introduced by Zhang and Shen [26], this paper provides an appropriate notion of morphisms on formal contexts and shows that the resulting category is equivalent to (a) the category of complete algebraic lattices and Scott continuous functions, and (b) a category of information systems and approximable mappings. Since the latter categories are cartesian closed, we obtain a cartesian closed category of formal contexts that respects both the context structures as well as the intrinsic notion of approximable concepts at the same time.


Category Theory Complete Lattice Concept Lattice Approximable Mapping Domain Theory 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Ganter, B., Wille, R.: Formal Concept Analysis — Mathematical Foundations. Springer, Berlin (1999)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barr, M.: *-Autonomous categories and linear logic. Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 1(2) (1991)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barwise, J., Seligman, J.: Information Flow: the logic of distributed systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1997)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Birkhoff, G.: Lattice Theory, vol. 25. AMS Colloquium Publications (1940)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Borceux, F.: Handbook of Categorical Algebra 1: Basic Category Theory. In: Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applictions, vol. 53, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1994)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Eiter, T., Leone, N., Mateis, C., Pfeifer, G., Scarcello, F.: A deductive system for nonmonotonic reasoning. In: Fuhrbach, U., Dix, J., Nerode, A. (eds.) LPNMR 1997. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNAI), vol. 1265, Springer, Heidelberg (1997)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Guarino, N., Poli, R. (eds.): Formal Ontology in Conceptual Analysis and Knowledge Representation. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1993)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hitzler, P., Wendt, M.: Formal concept analysis and resolution in algebraic domains. In: de Moor, A., Ganter, B. (eds.) Using Conceptual Structures — Contributions to ICCS 2003, pp. 157–170. Shaker Verlag, Aachen (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hitzler, P.: Default reasoning over domains and concept hierarchies. Technical Report WV–03–14, Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Group, Department of Computer Science, Dresden University of Technology (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Johnstone, P.: Stone Spaces. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1982)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lamarche, F.: From Chu spaces to cpos. In: Theory and Formal Methods of Computing 1994, pp. 283–305. Imperial College Press (1994)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Larsen, K., Winskel, G.: Using information systems to solve recursive domain equations. Information and Computation 91(2), 232–258 (1991)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    MacLane, S.: Categories for the Working Mathematician. Springer, Heidelberg (1971)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Plotkin, G.: Notes on the Chu construction and recursion, (manuscript) (1993)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pratt, V.: Chu spaces from the representational viewpoint. Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 96(1-3), 319–333 (1999)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rounds, W.C., Zhang, G.-Q.: Clausal logic and logic programming in algebraic domains. Information and Computation 171, 156–182 (2001)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Saraswat, V.: The category of constraint systems is Cartesian-closed. In: Proceedings of the Seventh Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, Santa Cruz, California, June 1992, pp. 341–345. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Scott, D.S.: Domains for denotational semantics. In: Nielsen, M., Schmidt, E.M. (eds.) ICALP 1982. LNCS, vol. 140, pp. 577–613. Springer, Heidelberg (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shen, G., Ye, T., Sun, J., Zhang, G.-Q.: Concept lattices, clustering, and visualization using LATEX (manuscript) (2004)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Simons, P., Niemelä, I., Soininen, T.: Extending and implementing the stable model semantics. Artificial Intelligence (200x) (to appear)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sowa, J.: Knowledge Representation: Logical, Philosophical, and Computational Foundations. Brooks Cole Publishing Co. (2000)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Spreen, D.: A note on strongly finite sequent structures. In: Zhang, Lawson, Liu, Luo (eds.) Domain Theory, Logic and Computation. Semantic Structures in Computation, vol. 3, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2004)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Vickers, S.: Topology via Logic. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1989)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wille, R.: Restructuring lattice theory: an approach based on hierarchies of concepts. In: Rival, I. (ed.) Ordered sets, Reidel, Dordrecht-Boston, pp. 445–470 (1982)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zhang, G.-Q.: Chu spaces, formal concepts, and domains. In: Proceedings of the 19th Conference on the Mathematical Foundations of Programming Semantics, Montreal, Canada, March 19-23, 2003, Electronic Notes in Computer Science, vol. 83, 16 (2003)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zhang, G.-Q., Shen, G.: Approximable concepts, Chu spaces, and information systems. In: de Paiva, Pratt (Guest Editors), Special Issue on Chu Spaces and Applications, Theory and Applications of Categories (accepted)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zhang, G.-Q., Shen, G., Staiger, J., Troy, A., Sun, J.: FcAWN – concept analysis as a formal method for automated web-menu design (Submitted)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zhang, G.-Q.: Logic of Domains, Birkhauser, Boston (1991)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pascal Hitzler
    • 1
  • Guo-Qiang Zhang
    • 2
  1. 1.Artificial Intelligence Institute, Department of Computer ScienceDresden University of TechnologyDresdenGermany
  2. 2.Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer ScienceCase Western Reserve UniversityClevelandU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations