Abstract
There is a diversity of ontology languages in use, among them \(\mathsf{OWL}\), RDF, OBO, Common Logic, and F-logic. Related languages such as UML class diagrams, entity-relationship diagrams and object role modeling provide bridges from ontology modeling to applications, e.g., in software engineering and databases. Also in model-driven engineering, there is a diversity of diagrams: UML consists of 15 different diagram types, and SysML provides further types. Finally, in software and hardware specification, a variety of formalisms are in use, like Z, VDM, first-order logic, temporal logic etc.
Another diversity appears at the level of ontology, model and specification modularity and relations among ontologies, specifications, and models. There is ontology matching and alignment, module extraction, interpolation, ontologies linked by bridges, interpretation and refinement, and combination of ontologies, models and specifications.
The distributed ontology, modeling and specification language (DOL) aims at providing a unified metalanguage for handling this diversity. In particular, DOL provides constructs for (1) ‘‘as-is’’ use of ontologies, models, and specifications (OMS) formulated in a specific ontology, modeling or specification language, (2) OMS formalized in heterogeneous logics, (3) modular OMS, (4) mappings between OMS, and (5) networks of OMS. This chapter sketches the design of the DOL language. DOL has been submitted as a proposal within the OntoIOp (ontology, model, specification integration and interoperability) standardisation activity of the object management Group (OMG).
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
DOL has formerly been standardized within ISO/TC 37/SC 3. The OntoIOp (ontology, modeling and specification integration and interoperability) activity is now being continued at OMG, see the project page at http://ontoiop.org.
- 2.
- 3.
The languages that we call ‘‘basic’’ OMS languages here are usually limited to one logic and do not provide meta-theoretical constructs.
- 4.
\(\mathbb{S}et\) is the category having all sets as objects and functions as arrows.
- 5.
\(\mathbb{C}at\) is the category of categories and functors. Strictly speaking, \(\mathbb{C}at\) is not a category but only a so-called quasicategory, which is a category that lives in a higher set-theoretic universe.
- 6.
That is, with the same objects as the original category.
- 7.
Note that extension, union, translation, reference, qualification and combination are defined for flattenable and elusive OMS, while interpolate/forget and extract are only defined for flattenable OMS.
- 8.
This is a mathematically abstracted version of DOL. In reality, signatures are represented by symbol sets, and signature morphisms by symbol maps. The details of passing from symbol sets (resp. maps) to signatures (resp. signature morphisms) are left out here. Also, we have left out OMS bridges, since their design is still being discussed.
- 9.
The theory of O, written, \(\mathbf{Th}(O)\), is the closure of \(\mathbf{Ax}(O)\) under logical entailment. Note, however, that throughout the text we use ‘‘theory’’ also more informally as denoting some set of axioms in a particular signature and logic.
- 10.
I is normally determined by the context of the enclosing library and passed around as an additional parameter of the semantics. For simplicity, here we let I become part of the basic OMS.
- 11.
Note that not all OMS can be downloaded by dereferencing their IRIs. Implementing a catalogue mechanism in DOL-aware applications might remedy this problem.
- 12.
Some of the following listings abbreviate IRIs using prefixes but omit the prefix bindings for readability.
- 13.
While owl:same as is borrowed from the vocabulary of \(\mathsf{OWL}\), it is commonly used in the RDF logic to link to resources in external graphs, which should be treated as if their IRI were the same as the subject’s IRI.
- 14.
We assume that GALEN is available as an OWL ontology.
- 15.
If this smallest signature does not exist, the semantics is undefined.
- 16.
Interpolants need not always exist, and even if they do, tools might only be able to approximate them.
- 17.
In practice, one looks for a finite subset that still is logically equivalent to this set. Note that \(\Updelta^{\bullet}\) is the set of logical consequences of \(\Updelta\), i.e. \(\Updelta^{\bullet}=\mathbf{Th}(\Updelta)\).
- 18.
If the smallest such subtheory does not exist, the semantics is undefined. In [22], it is shown that it does exist in usual institutions.
- 19.
Note that the resulting module can still contain symbols from \(\Upsigma\), because the resulting signature may be enlarged.
- 20.
Note that BioPortal’s [40] mappings are correspondences in the sense of the Alignment API and hence of DOL. BioPortal only allows users to collect correspondences, but not to group them into alignments. In a sense, for each pair of ontologies, all BioPortal users contribute to a big alignment between these.
- 21.
Ontohub’s sources are freely available at https://github.com/ontohub/ontohub.
- 22.
Some (but only few) of DOL’s features are still being implemented at the time of the writing of this chapter.
- 23.
‘‘Linked data’’ is a set of best practises for publishing structured data on the Web in a machine-friendly way [1]. DOL and Ontohub conform with linked data.
References
Berners-Lee, T.: Design Issues: Linked Data. July 27, 2006. http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html. Accessed on 2010-01-20
Bidoit, M., Mosses, P.D.: CASL User Manual. LNCS (IFIP Series) 2900. Freely available at http://www.cofi.info. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2004)
Bonatti, P.A., Lutz, C., Wolter, F.: The Complexity of Circumscription in DLs. J. Artif. Intell. Res. (JAIR) 35, 717–773 (2009)
Borzyszkowski, T.: Logical systems for structured specifications. Theor. Comput. Sci. 286, 197–245 (2002)
Burstall, R.M., Goguen, J.A.: The Semantics of CLEAR, A Specification Language. In Abstract Software Specifications, 1979 Copenhagen Winter School, January 22–February 2, 1979, Proceedings. Ed. by D. Bjørner. Vol. 86. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 292–332. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (1979). http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-10007-5_41
Cambouropoulos, E., Kaliakatsos-Papakostas, M., Kühnberger, K.-U., Kutz, O., Smaill, A.: Concept invention and music: Creating novel harmonies via conceptual blending. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Interdisciplinary Musicology (CIM-2014). Berlin (2014)
Codescu, M., Mossakowski, T.: Heterogeneous colimits. In: Boulanger, F., Gaston, C., Schobbens, P.-Y.: MoVaH’08 Workshop on Modeling, Validation and Heterogeneity. IEEE Press (2008). http://www.computer.org/portal/web/csdl/abs/proceedings/icstw/2008/3388/00/3388toc.htm
Codescu, M., Mossakowski, T., Kutz, O.: A Categorical Approach to Ontology Alignment. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Ontology Matching (OM-2014), ISWC-2014, Riva del Garda, Trentino, Italy. CEUR-WS online proceedings (2014)
COLORE. An open repository of first-order ontologies represented in Common Logic. http://colore.googlecode.com
David, J., Euzenat, J., Scharffe, F., dos Santos, C.T.: The Alignment API 4.0. Semant. Web 2(1), 3–10 (2011)
Diaconescu, R., Goguen, J., Stefaneas, P.: Logical support for modularisation. In: 2nd Workshop on Logical Environments, pp. 83–130. CUP, New York (1993)
Goguen, J.A., Burstall, R.M.: Institutions: Abstract Model Theory for Specification and Programming. J. Assoc. Comput. Mach. 39 (1992). Predecessor in: LNCS 164, 221–256 (1984), pp. 95–146
Goguen, J., Roşu, G.: Institution morphisms. Form. Asp. Comput. 13, 274–307 (2002)
Goguen, J.A., Rosu, G.: Composing hidden information modules over inclusive institutions. In: Owe, O., Krogdahl, S., Lyche, T. (eds.) From Object-Orientation to Formal Methods, Essays in Memory of Ole-Johan Dahl, vol. 2635. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 96–123. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2004). http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-39993-3_7
Grau, B.C., Honavar, V., Schlicht, A., Wolter, F. (eds.): Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Modular Ontologies. WoMO 2007, Whistler, Canada, October 28, 2007, vol. 315. CEUR Workshop Proceedings. CEUR-WS.org (2008)
Haase, P., Honavar, V., Kutz, O., Sure, Y., Tamilin, A. (eds.): Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Modular Ontologies. WoMO’06, co-located with the International Semantic Web Conference, ISWC’06 November 5, 2006, Athens, Georgia, USA, vol. 232. CEUR Workshop Proceedings. CEUR-WS.org (2007)
The NeOn Ontology Engineering Toolkit. http://www.neon-project.org/ (2008). http://watson.kmi.open.ac.uk/Downloads%20and%20Publications_files/neon-toolkit.pdf
Hayes, P.: RDF Semantics. W3C Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Feb. 10 (2004). http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-mt-20040210/
Horridge, M.: Protégé OWL Tutorial. Version v1.3. Mar. 24 (2011). http://owl.cs.manchester.ac.uk/tutorials/protegeowltutorial/
Knapp, A., Mossakowski, T., Roggenbach, M.: Towards an institutional framework for heterogeneous formal development in UML – A position paper. In: Nicola, R.D., Hennicker, R. (eds.) Software, Services and Systems. Essays Dedicated to Martin Wirsing on the Occasion of His Emeritation, vol. 8950. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2015)
Knapp, A., Mossakowski, T., Roggenbach, M., Glauer, M.: An Institution for Simple UML State Machines. CoRR abs/1411.4495 (2014). http://arxiv.org/abs/1411.4495
Kontchakov, R., Wolter, F., Zakharyaschev, M.: Logic-based ontology comparison and module extraction, with an application to DL-Lite. Artif. Intell. 174(15), 1093–1141 (2010). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2010.06.003
Kutz, O., Bateman, J., Neuhaus, F., Mossakowski, T., Bhatt, M.: E pluribus unum: Formalisation, use-cases, computational support for conceptual blending. In: Besold, T.R., Schorlemmer, M., Smaill, A. (eds.) Computational Creativity Research: Towards Creative Machines. Thinking Machines. Springer, Atlantis (2014)
Kutz, O., Hois, J., Bao, J., Cuenca Grau, B. (eds.): Modular Ontologies – Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop (WoMO 2010), vol. 210. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications. IOS Press, Toronto, Canada (2010)
Kutz, O., Lücke, D., Mossakowski, T., Normann, I.: The OWL in the CASL – Designing Ontologies Across Logics. In: Dolbear, C., Ruttenberg, A., Sattler, U. (eds.) OWL: Experiences and Directions. 5th International Workshop (OWLED-08), co-located with ISWC-08, Karlsruhe, Germany, October 26–27: CEUR-WS, vol. 432 (2008)
Kutz, O., Mossakowski, T., Hastings, J., Castro, A.G., Sojic, A.: Hyperontology for the Biomedical Ontologist: A Sketch and Some Examples. In: Workshop on Working with Multiple Biomedical Ontologies (WoMBO at ICBO 2011). Buffalo, NY, USA (2011)
Kutz, O., Mossakowski, T., Lücke, D.: Carnap, Goguen, the Hyperontologies: Logical Pluralism and Heterogeneous Structuring in Ontology Design. Log. Univers. 4, 2 (2010). Special issue on ‘Is Logic Universal?’
Kutz, O., Schneider, T. (eds.): Modular Ontologies – Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop (WoMO 2011), vol. 230. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2011)
Lifschitz, V.: Circumscription. In: Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, vol. 3, pp. 297–352. Oxford University Press, United Kingdom (1994)
Lüttich, K., Masolo, C., Borgo, S.: Development of Modular Ontologies in CASL. In: Haase, P., Honavar, V., Kutz, O., Sure, Y., Tamilin, A. (eds.) WoMO, vol. 232. CEUR Workshop Proceedings. CEUR-WS.org (2006)
Lutz, C., Seylan, I., Wolter, F.: An automata-theoretic approach to uniform interpolation and approximation in the description logic EL. In: Rewka, G., Eiter, T., McIlraith, S.A. (eds.) KR. AAAI Press (2012)
Lutz, C., Wolter, F.: Foundations for uniform interpolation and forgetting in expressive description logics. In: IJCAI, pp. 989–995. (2011)
Meseguer, J.: General logics. In: Ebbinghaus, H.J. (ed.) Logic Colloquium ’87, pp. 275–329. North Holland (1989)
Mossakowski, T.: Hets: the Heterogeneous Tool Set. http://hets.eu. (Accessed 2012-12-10)
Mossakowski, T., Haxthausen, A., Sannella, D., Tarlecki, A.: CASL: The common algebraic specification language. In: Bjorner, M.H.D. (ed.) Logics of Formal Specification Languages. Monographs in Theoretical Computer Science, chap. 3, pp. 241–298. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74107-7_5
Mossakowski, T., Kutz, O.: The onto-logical translation graph. In: Kutz, O., Schneider. T. (eds.) Modular Ontologies. IOS, Amsterdam (2011)
Mossakowski, T., Kutz, O., Lange, C.: Semantics of the distributed ontology language: Institutes and institutions. In: Martí-Oliet, N., Palomino, M. (eds.) Recent Trends in Algebraic Development Techniques, 21th International Workshop, WADT 2012, vol. 7841. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 212–230. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2013). http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-37635-1_13
Mossakowski, T., Lange, C., Kutz, O.: Three Semantics for the Core of the Distributed Ontology Language. In: Donnelly, M., Guizzardi, G. (eds.) 7th International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems (FOIS), vol. 239. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, pp. 337–352. FOIS Best Paper Award. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2012)
Mossakowski, T., Maeder, C., Lüttich, K.: The Heterogeneous Tool Set. In: Grumberg, O., Huth, M. (eds.) TACAS 2007, vol. 4424. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 519–522. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Noy, N.F., Shah, N.H., Whetzel, P.L., Dai, B., Dorf, M., Griffith, N., Jonquet, C., Rubin, D.L., Storey, M.-A., Chute, C.G., Musen, M.A.: BioPortal: ontologies and integrated data resources at the click of a mouse. Nucl. Acids Res. 37, W170–W173 (2009). http://bioportal.bioontology.org
Sannella, D., Tarlecki, A.: Specifications in an arbitrary institution. Inf. Comput. 76, 165–210 (1988)
Sannella, D., Tarlecki, A.: Foundations of Algebraic Specification and Formal Software Development. EATCS Monographs in Theoretical Computer Science. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2012)
Sattler, U., Tamilin, A. (eds.): Workshop on Ontologies: Reasoning and Modularity (WORM-08), vol. 348. (ESWC) Tenerife, Spain: CEUR Workshop Proceedings (2008). http://ftp.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/Publications/CEUR-WS/Vol-348/
Schneider, M., Rudolph, S., Sutcliffe, G.: Modeling in OWL 2 without Restrictions. In: Rodriguez-Muro, M., Jupp, S., Srinivas, K. (eds.) Proceedings of the 10th International Workshop on OWL: Experiences and Directions (OWLED 2013) co-located with 10th Extended Semantic Web Conference (ESWC 2013), Montpellier, France, May 26–27, 2013, vol. 1080. CEUR Workshop Proceedings. CEUR-WS.org (2013). http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1080/owled2013_14.pdf
Schneider, T., Walther, D. (eds.): Proceedings of the 6h International Workshop on Modular Ontologies, vol. 875. CEUR-WS (2012)
Wang, Z., Wang, K., Topor, R.W., Pan, J.Z.: Forgetting for knowledge bases in DL-Lite. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 58(1–2), 117–151 (2010)
Wirsing, M.: Structured Algebraic Specifications: A Kernel Language. Theor. Comput. Sci. 42, 123–249 (1986). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0304-3975(86)90051-4
Zimmermann, A., Krötzsch, M., Euzenat, J., Hitzler, P.: Formalizing ontology alignment and its operations with category theory. In: Proceedings of FOIS-06, pp. 277–288 (2006)
Acknowledgment
The development of DOL is supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG), Project I1-[OntoSpace] of the SFB/TR 8 ‘‘Spatial Cognition.’’ The project COINVENT acknowledges the financial support of the Future and Emerging Technologies (FET) programme within the Seventh Framework Programme for Research of the European Commission, under FET-Open Grant number: 611553. The authors would like to thank the OntoIOp working group for their valuable input, particularly Michael Grüninger, Maria Keet, Christoph Lange, and Peter Yim. We also want to thank Yazmin Angelica Ibañez, Thomas Schneider and Carsten Lutz for valuable input on interpolation and module extraction.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Mossakowski, T., Codescu, M., Neuhaus, F., Kutz, O. (2015). The Distributed Ontology, Modeling and Specification Language – DOL. In: Koslow, A., Buchsbaum, A. (eds) The Road to Universal Logic. Studies in Universal Logic. Birkhäuser, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15368-1_21
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15368-1_21
Published:
Publisher Name: Birkhäuser, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-15367-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-15368-1
eBook Packages: Mathematics and StatisticsMathematics and Statistics (R0)