Griwes: Generic Model and Preliminary Specifications for a Graph-Based Knowledge Representation Toolkit

  • Jean-François Baget
  • Olivier Corby
  • Rose Dieng-Kuntz
  • Catherine Faron-Zucker
  • Fabien Gandon
  • Alain Giboin
  • Alain Gutierrez
  • Michel Leclère
  • Marie-Laure Mugnier
  • Rallou Thomopoulos
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5113)

Abstract

Griwes is an initiative to develop a common model and an open-source freeware platform shared by different graph-based frameworks. We provide an overview of its objectives, architecture and specifications. We detail some of the basic mathematical structures that are used to characterize the primitives for graph-based knowledge representation. We then propose to factorize recurrent knowledge representation primitives that can be shared across specific graph-based languages and we provide a proof of concept by showing how two languages (Simple Conceptual Graphs and RDF) can be described in this framework.

Keywords

graph-based languages semantic web platform 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Baget, J.B.: RDF entailment as a graph homomorphism. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Semantic Web Conference. LNCS, pp. 82–96. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baget, J.-F., Mugnier, M.-L.: The SG Family: Extensions of Simple Conceptual Graphs. In: IJCAI, pp. 205–212 (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Broekstra, J., Kampman, A., van Harmelen, F.: Sesame: A Generic Architecture for Storing and Querying RDF and RDF Schema. In: Horrocks, I., Hendler, J. (eds.) ISWC 2002. LNCS, vol. 2342, pp. 54–68. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Carroll, J. J., Dickinson, I., Dollin, C., Reynolds, D., Seaborne, A., Wilkinson, K.: Jena: Implementing the semantic web recommendations. Technical Report HP Lab (2003) Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Corby, O., Dieng-Kuntz, R., Faron-Zucker, C.: Querying the Semantic Web with the Corese Search Engine. In: ECAI, pp. 705–709. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2004)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Corby, O., Faron-Zucker, C.: Implementation of SPARQL Query Language based on Graph Homomorphism. In: Proc. 15th International Conference on Conceptual Structures (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fensel, D., Angele, J., Decker, S., Erdmann, M., Schnurr, H.-P., Staab, S., Studer, R., Witt, A.: On2broker: Semantic-based access to information sources at the WWW. In: World Conference on the WWW and Internet (1999) Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gandon, F., Sadeh, N.: Semantic Web Technologies to Reconcile Privacy and Context Awareness. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 1(3), 241–260 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Genest, D., Salvat, E.: A Platform Allowing Typed Nested Graphs: How CoGITo Became CoGITaNT. In: Mugnier, M.-L., Chein, M. (eds.) ICCS 1998. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1453, pp. 154–161. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Guarino, N., Masolo, C., Vetere, G.: Ontoseek: Content-based access to the Web. IEEE Intelligent, Systems 14(3), 70–80 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Haarslev, V., Möller, R.: Racer: An OWL Reasoning Agent for the Semantic Web. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Applications, Products and Services of Web-based Support Systems, Halifax, Canada, October 13, pp. 91–95 (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kabbaj, A., Bouzoubaa, K., ElHachimi, K., Ourdani, N.: Ontology in Amine Platform: Structures and Processes. In: 14th Proc. Int. Conf. Conceptual Structures, ICCS 2006, Aalborg, Denmark (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kopena, J., Regli, W.: DAMLJessKB: A Tool for Reasoning with the Semantic Web. IEEE Intelligent Systems 18(3), 74–77 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Martin, P., Eklund, P.: Knowledge Retrieval and the World Wide Web. IEEE Intelligent, Systems 15(3), 18–25 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Miller, L., Seaborne, A., Reggiori, A.: Three Implementations of SquishQL, a Simple RDF Query Language. In: Horrocks, I., Hendler, J. (eds.) ISWC 2002. LNCS, vol. 2342, pp. 423–435. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Motik, Sattler, U.: KAON2, A Comparison of Reasoning Techniques for Querying Large Description Logic Aboxes. In: Hermann, M., Voronkov, A. (eds.) LPAR 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4246, pp. 227–241. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sintek, M., Decker, S.: Triple: A Query, Inference and Transformation Language for the Semantic Web. In: Horrocks, I., Hendler, J. (eds.) ISWC 2002. LNCS, vol. 2342, pp. 364–378. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sirin, E., Parsia, B., Grau, B.C., Kalyanpur, A., Katz, Y.: Pellet: A practical OWL-DL reasoner. Journal of Web Semantics 5(2) (2007)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sowa, J.F.: Conceptual graphs for a database interface. IBM Journal of Research and Development 20(4), 336–357 (1976)MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tsarkov, D., Horrocks, I.: FaCT++ Description Logic Reasoner: System Description. LNCS, vol. 4130. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jean-François Baget
    • 1
    • 2
  • Olivier Corby
    • 1
  • Rose Dieng-Kuntz
    • 1
  • Catherine Faron-Zucker
    • 3
  • Fabien Gandon
    • 1
  • Alain Giboin
    • 1
  • Alain Gutierrez
    • 1
  • Michel Leclère
    • 2
  • Marie-Laure Mugnier
    • 2
  • Rallou Thomopoulos
    • 2
    • 4
  1. 1.Edelweiss, INRIA Sophia Antipolis Méditerranée 
  2. 2.RCR, LIRMM, UMII, CNRS 
  3. 3.KEWI, I3S, UNSA, CNRS 
  4. 4.IATE Joint Research Unit, INRA Montpellier 

Personalised recommendations