Ontology Negotiation: How Agents Can Really Get to Know Each Other

  • Sidney C. Bailin
  • Walt Truszkowski
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2564)

Abstract

The past several years have witnessed a proliferation of information sources on the world-wide-web, and of information agents with widely varying specialties. The unmanageability of massive amounts of information is becoming apparent and is having an impact on professions that rely on distributed archived information.

Ontology negotiation is becoming increasingly recognized as a crucial element of scalable agent technology. This is because agents, by their very nature, are supposed to operate with a fair amount of autonomy and independence from their end-users. Part of this independence is the ability to enlist other agents for help in performing a task (such as locating information on the web). The agents enlisted for help may be "owned" by a different end-user or organization (such as a document archive), and there is no guarantee that they will use the same terminology or understand the same concepts (objects, operators, theorems, rules) as the recruiting agent.

For NASA, the need for ontology negotiation arises at the boundaries between scientific disciplines. For example: modeling the effects of global warming might involve knowledge about imaging, climate analysis, ecology, demographics, industrial economics, and biology. The need for ontology negotiation also arises at the boundaries between scientific programs. For example, a Principal Investigator may want to use information from a previous mission to complement downloads from the instruments currently deployed.

Keywords

Application Program Interface User Agent Ontology Evolution Scientific Archive Capability Statement 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Fellbaum, C.: WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database. MIT Press, Cambridge (1998)MATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tarski, A.: On Undecidable Statements in Enlarged Systems of Logic and the Concept of Truth. Journal of Symbolic Logic 4, 105–112 (1939)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Clark, P., Porter, B.: Building Concept Representations from Reusable Components. In: AAAI 1997, pp. 369–376 (1997)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cybenko, G., Jiang, G.: Matching Conflicts: Functional Validation of Agents. Agent Conflicts: Papers from the 1999 AAAI Workshop. Technical Report WS-99-08, AAAI Press, Menlo Park, CA, Pages 14 - 19 (1999)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    McCallum, A., Nigam, K., Rennie, J., Seymore, K.: Building Domain- Specific Search Engines with Machine Learning Techniques. In: Intelligent Agents in Cyberspace: Papers from the 1999 AAAI Symposium, Stanford, CA, March 22 - 24, pp. 28–39. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (1999) Technical Report SS-99-03,Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Takeda, H., Iwata, M., Sawada, A., Nishida, T.: An Ontology-based Cooperative Environment for Real-world Agents. In: Second International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems (ICMAS 1996), pp. 353–360. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (1996)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Decker, S., Brickley, D., Saarela, J., Angele, J.: A Query and Inference Service for RDF. In: QL 1998: The Query Languages Workshop, Boston, MA (1998), Available at: http://www.w3.org/TandS/QL/QL98/pp/queryservice.html
  8. 8.
    Guarino, N., Masolo, C., Vetere, G.: OntoSeek: Content-Based Access to the Web. IEEE Intelligent Systems 14(3), 70–80 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Heflin, J., Hendler, J., Luke, S.: Coping with Changing Ontologies in a Distributed Environment. Ontology management, Papers from the AAAI Workshop, Technical Report WS-99-13, American Association for Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) Press (1999)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wiederhold, G.: Mediators in the architecture of future information systems. IEEE Computer 25 (1992)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Finin, T., Labrou, Y., Mayfield, J.: KQML as an Agent Communication Language. In: Bradshaw, J. (ed.) Software Agents, MIT Press, Cambridge (1997), Available at http://www.cs.umbc.edu/kqml/papers Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    FIPA Agent Communications Language, FIPA 1997 Specification, Version 2. Available at, http://fipa.org/repository/index.html (October 1998)
  13. 13.
    KIF. Knowledge Interchange Format: Draft Proposed American National Standard, NCITS.T2/90-004 (1998), Available at: http://logic.stanford.edu/kif/dpans.html

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sidney C. Bailin
    • 1
  • Walt Truszkowski
    • 2
  1. 1.Knowledge Evolution, Inc.Washington, DCUSA
  2. 2.NASA/Goddard Space Flight CenterAdvanced Automation Technology BranchGreenbeltUSA

Personalised recommendations