Advertisement

CML: The commonKADS conceptual modelling language

  • Guus Schreiber
  • Bob Wielinga
  • Hans Akkermans
  • Walter Van de Velde
  • Anjo Anjewierden
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 867)

Abstract

We present a structured language for the specification of knowledge models according to the CommonKADS methodology. This language is called CML (Conceptual Modelling Language) and provides both a structured textual notation and a diagrammatic notation for expertise models. The use of our CML is illustrated by a variety of examples taken from the VT elevator design system.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    M. Aben. CommonKADS inferences. ESPRIT Project P5248 KADS-II/M2/TR/UvA/041/1.0, University of Amsterdam, June 1993.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    J. M. Akkermans, B. J. Wielinga, and A. Th. Schreiber. Steps in constructing problem-solving methods. In B. R. Gaines and M. A. Musen, editors, Proceedings of the 8th Banff Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-Based Systems Workshop. Volume 2: Shareable and Reusable Problem-Solving Methods, pages 29–1–29–21, Alberta, Canada, January 30–February 4 1994. SRDG Publications, University of Calgary.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    V. R. Benjamins. Problem Solving Methods for Diagnosis. PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, June 1993.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J.H Gennari, S.W Tu, T.E Rotenfluh, and M.A. Musen. Mapping domains to methods in support of reuse. In Proceedings of the Knowledge Acquisition Workshop KAW-94, Banff, Canada, 1994. SRDG Publications, University of Calgary.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    T. Gruber. Ontolingua: A mechanism to support portable ontologies. version 3.0. Technical report, Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Stanford University, California, 1992.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    T.R. Gruber. A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowledge Acquisition, 5:199–220, 1993.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Marc Linster. Knowledge acquisition based on explicit methods of problem-solving. PhD thesis, University of Kaiserslautern, 1992.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    S. Marcus and J. McDermott. SALT: A knowledge acquisition language for propose-and-revise systems. Artificial Intelligence, 39(1):1–38, 1989.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. Rumbaugh, M. Blaha, W. Premerlani, F. Eddy, and W. Lorensen. Object-Oriented Modelling and Design. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1991.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    A. Th. Schreiber. Applying KADS to the office assignment domain. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 40(2), 1994. Special issue on Sisyphus 91/92 “Models of Problem Solving”. In press.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    A. Th. Schreiber, P. Terpstra, P. Magni, and M. van Velzen. Analysing and implementing VT using COMMON-KADS. In A. Th. Schreiber and W. P. Birmingham, editors, Proceedings of the 8th Banff Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-Based Systems Workshop. Volume 3: Sisyphus II — VT Elevator Design Problem, pages 44–1–44–29, Alberta, Canada, January 30–February 4 1994. SRDG Publications, University of Calgary.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Peter Terpstra. An environment for application design. Deliverable DM7.5a, ESPRIT Project P5248 KADS-II/M7/DD/UvA/072/1.0, University of Amsterdam, 1994.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    F. van Harmelen and J. R. Balder. (ML)2: a formal language for KADS models of expertise. Knowledge Acquisition, 4(1), 1992. Special issue: ‘The KADS approach to knowledge engineering', reprinted in KADS: A Principled Approach to Knowledge-Based System Development, 1993, Schreiber, A.Th. et al. (eds.).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    B. J. Wielinga and A. Th. Schreiber. Reusable and shareable knowledge bases: A european perspective. In Proceedings International Conference on Building and Sharing of Very Large-Scaled Knowledge Bases '93, pages 103–115, Tokyo, Japan, December 1–4 1993. Japan Informtation Processing Development Center.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    B. J. Wielinga, W. Van de Velde, A. Th. Schreiber, and J. M. Akkermans. The KADS knowledge modelling approach. In R. Mizoguchi, H. Motoda, J. Boose, B. Gaines, and R. Quinlan, editors, Proceedings of the 2nd Japanese Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-Based Systems Workshop, pages 23–42. Hitachi, Advanced Research Laboratory, Hatoyama, Saitama, Japan, 1992.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    B. J. Wielinga, W. Van de Velde, A. Th. Schreiber, and J. M. Akkermans. Towards a unification of knowledge modelling approaches. In Jean-Marc David, Jean-Paul Krivine, and Reid Simmons, editors, Second Generation Expert Systems, pages 299–335. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, Germany, 1993.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    G. Yost. Configuring elevator systems. Technical report, Digital Equipment Corporation, 111 Locke Drive (LMO2/K11), Marlboro MA 02172, 1992.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    E. Yourdon. Modern Structured Analysis. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1989.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Guus Schreiber
    • 1
  • Bob Wielinga
    • 1
  • Hans Akkermans
    • 3
    • 4
  • Walter Van de Velde
    • 2
  • Anjo Anjewierden
    • 1
  1. 1.Social Science InformaticsUniversity of AmsterdamWB AmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.AI LabFree University of BrusselsBrusselsBelgium
  3. 3.Netherlands Energy Research Foundation ECNZG PettenThe Netherlands
  4. 4.Information Systems DepartmentUniversity of TwenteAE EnschedeThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations