Knowledge Engineering for Large Ontologies with Sigma KEE 3.0

  • Adam Pease
  • Stephan Schulz
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8562)


The Suggested Upper Merged Ontology (SUMO) is a large, comprehensive ontology stated in higher-order logic. It has co-evolved with a development environment called the Sigma Knowledge Engineering Environment (SigmaKEE). A large and important subset of SUMO can be expressed in first-order logic with equality. SigmaKEE has integrated different reasoning systems in the past, but they either had to be significantly modified, or integrated in a way that multiple queries to the same theory required expensive full re-processing of the full knowledge base.

To overcome this problem, to create a simpler system configuration that is easier for users to install and manage, and to integrate a state-of-the-art theorem prover we have now integrated Sigma with the E theorem prover. The E distribution includes a simple server version that loads and indexes the full knowledge base, and supports interactive queries via a simple interface based on text streams. No special modifications to E were necessary for the integration, so SigmaKEE can be easily upgraded to future versions.


Sentiment Analysis Automate Reasoning Knowledge Engineer Text Editor Integrate Development Environment 
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.
    Benzmüller, C., Pease, A.: Progress in automating higher-order ontology reasoning. In: Konev, B., Schmidt, R., Schulz, S. (eds.) Workshop on Practical Aspects of Automated Reasoning (PAAR 2010). CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Edinburgh, UK (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Benzmüller, C., Pease, A.: Reasoning with Embedded Formulas and Modalities in SUMO. In: The ECAI 2010 Workshop on Automated Reasoning about Context and Ontology Evolution (August 2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bond, F., Paik, K.: A survey of wordnets and their licenses. In: Proceedings of the 6th Global WordNet Conference (GWC, Matsue, pp, 64–71 (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fellbaum, C.: WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database. Language, Speech, and Communication. MIT Press (1998),
  5. 5.
    Hoder, K., Voronkov, A.: Sine Qua Non for Large Theory Reasoning. In: Bjørner, N., Sofronie-Stokkermans, V. (eds.) CADE 2011. LNCS, vol. 6803, pp. 299–314. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Niles, I., Pease, A.: Toward a Standard Upper Ontology. In: Welty, C., Smith, B. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems, FOIS 2001 (2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pease, A.: Ontology: A Practical Guide. Articulate Software Press, Angwin (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pease, A., Benzmller, C.: Sigma: An Integrated Development Environment for Logical Theories. AI Comm. 26, 9–97 (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pease, A., Li, J.: Controlled English to Logic Translation. In: Poli, R., Healy, M., Kameas, A. (eds.) Theory and Applications of Ontology. Springer (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pease, A., Li, J., Nomorosa, K.: WordNet and SUMO for Sentiment Analysis. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Global Wordnet Conference (GWC 2012), Matsue, Japan (2012)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pease, A., Rust, G.: Formal Ontology for Media Rights Transactions. In: Garcia, R. (ed.) Semantic Web Methodologies for E-Business Applications. IGI publishing (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pease, A., Sutcliffe, G.: First Order Reasoning on a Large Ontology. In: Proceedings of the CADE-21 Workshop on Empirically Successful Automated Reasoning on Large Theories, ESARLT (2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pease, A., Sutcliffe, G., Siegel, N., Trac, S.: Large Theory Reasoning with SUMO at CASC. AI Comm. 23(2-3), 137–144 (2010); Special issue on Practical Aspects of Automated ReasoningGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pelletier, F.J., Sutcliffe, G., Suttner, C.: The Development of CASC. AI Communications 15(2), 79–90 (2002)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Riazanov, A., Voronkov, A.: The Design and Implementation of VAMPIRE. Journal of AI Communications 15(2/3), 91–110 (2002)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schulz, S.: E – A Brainiac Theorem Prover. AI Comm 15(2/3), 111–126 (2002)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schulz, S.: System Description: E 1.8. In: McMillan, K., Middeldorp, A., Voronkov, A. (eds.) LPAR-19 2013. LNCS, vol. 8312, pp. 735–743. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sutcliffe, G., Suttner, C.: The state of CASC. AI Comm 19(1), 35–48 (2006)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sutcliffe, G., Zimmer, J., Schulz, S.: TSTP Data-Exchange Formats for Automated Theorem Proving Tools. In: Sorge, V., Zhang, W. (eds.) Distributed Constraint Problem Solving and Reasoning in Multi-Agent Systems. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, pp. 201–215. IOS Press (2004)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sutcliffe, G., Schulz, S., Claessen, K., Van Gelder, A.: Using the TPTP Language for Writing Derivations and Finite Interpretations. In: Furbach, U., Shankar, N. (eds.) IJCAR 2006. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4130, pp. 67–81. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sutcliffe, G., Stickel, M., Schulz, S., Urban, J.: Answer Extraction for TPTP, (acccessed August 7, 2013)
  22. 22.
    Trac, S., Sutcliffe, G., Pease, A.: Integration of the TPTPWorld into SigmaKEE. In: Proceedings of IJCAR 2008 Workshop on Practical Aspects of Automated Reasoning (PAAR 2008). CEUR Workshop Proceedings (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Adam Pease
    • 1
  • Stephan Schulz
    • 2
  1. 1.Articulate SoftwareUSA
  2. 2.Institut für InformatikTechnische Universität MünchenGermany

Personalised recommendations