Advertisement

Using semantic links for reuse in Knowledge Base Systems

  • Karima Messaadia
  • Mourad Oussalah
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1460)

Abstract

Constructing Knowledge Base Systems using pre-existing generic components rather than from scratch is a promising way to minimise their development time and facilitate their evolution and maintenance. The concepts commonly used in describing KBS are tasks, PSMs and domains. Developers have to select them from a library, adapt and link them so that they fit their specific needs. In order to help developers to quickly understand, find, and configure the components best suited to their applications, we need to specify languages for describing tasks, PSMs and domains plus the different interactions between them. In this paper, we describe a methodology for structuring a library which integrates different components and relationships defined through levels of description: conceptual, ontological, object and implementation. In order to clarify the kinds of relationship, we propose to introduce at the conceptual level two other new concepts: inter-concept and intra-concept links. The former refer to relationships between different concepts, the latter between similar concepts. We propose to use ontologies to describe these concepts, improving thus their reusability and sharing. We use semantic and transfer links, often applied in databases systems and object modelling, to specify inter- and intra-concept links.

Keywords

AI methodologies reuse semantic links transfer links ontology 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. [1]
    J. Angele, D. Fensel & R. Studer, Domain and Task Modelling in MIKE, Proc. IFIP WG. Joint Working Conference, Geneva. Chapman & Hall 1996.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    R. Benjamins & C. Pierret-Golbreicht, Assumptions of Problem Solving Method, in 8th European Knowledge Acquisition workshop, EKAW-96, Springier-Verlag, 1996.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    R.Benjamins & G. Van heijst, Modelling Multiple Models, In proceeding of CESA96, IMACS Multiconference, 1996.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    P. Beys & R. Benjamins & G. van Heijst, Remedying the Reusability-Usability Tradeoff for Problem-solving Methods, proceedings of (KAW'96), Banff, Canada, Novembre 9–14, 1996.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    B. Chandrasekaran & T.R, Josephson, The Ontology of Tasks and Methods. Symposium on ontological Engineering, AAAI Spring Symposium Series, Stanford, CA. 1997.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    B. Chandrasekaran, T.R, Johnson & J.W Smith, Task-Structure Analysis for Knowledge Modelling, Communication of the ACM, 35(9): 124–137, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    E. Coelho & G. Lapalme, Describing Reusable Problem-Solving Methods with a Method Ontology, proceedings of (KAW'96), Banff Alberta, Canada, Novembre 9–14, 1996.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    D. Fensel: The tower of adapter Method for developing and reusing problem solving methods. In E. Plaza & al (eds.), Knowledge acquisition, modeling and management, (LNAI), 1319, Springler-Verlag, Berlin, 1997.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    D. Fensel, H. Erikson, M. Musen & R. Studer, Conceptual and Format Specifications of Problem-Solving Methods. In International Journal of Expert Systems, 9(4), 1996.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    T. R. Gruber: A Translation Approach to Portable Ontology Specifications, Knowledge Acquisition, 5(2), 1993.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    G. Klinker & Al, Usable and Reusable Programming Constructs, Knowledge Acquisition, 3:117–136, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    M. Magnan, Objets complexes, In Oussalah & Al (Eds): Ingénierie objet concept et techniques, InterEditions, Masson, (in French) 1997.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    J. McDermott, Preliminary steps towards a taxonomy of problem solving methods, in S. Marcus edt, Kluwer academic publisher, Boston 88.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    M. Molina, Y. Shahar, J.Cuena, & M. Musen, A Structure of problem-Solving Methods for Real-time Decision Support: Modelling Approaches Using PROTEGE-II and KSM. proceedings of (KAW'96), Banff Alberta, Canada, Novembre 9–14, 1996.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    E. Motta, Trends in knowledge modelling: Report on 7th KEML Workshop. The Knowledge Engineering Review, Volume 12/Number 2/June 1997.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    E. Motta & Z. Zdrahal, An Approach to the organisation of a Library of Problem-Solving Methods which integrates the search paradigm with task and method ontologies, International Journal of Human Computer Studies, July 1997.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    A. Newel, The knowledge level, artificial Intelligence 18, 1982, 87–127.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    C. Pierret-Golbreich, TASK MODEL: A Framework for the Design of Models of Expertise. and Their Operationalisation. KAW'96. Banff, Alberta, Canada 1994.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    C. Pierret-Golbreich, TASK un environnement pour le developpement de systèmes à base de connaissances flexibles, habilitation à diriger les recherches, (in French) LRI, Orsay, 1996.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    C. Oussalah & al, A framework for modeling the structure and behavior of a system including multi level simulation, IASTED INT. Symp. On Applied Simulation an Modeling, ASM, Grindelwald, Switzerland, February 1988.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    L. Steels, component of expertise, AI magazine, 11(2), 28–49, 1990.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    K. Poeck & U. Gappa, Making Role limiting shells more flexible. In Aussenac & AL. Edts, EKAW93 Toulouse, lecture notes in AI 723, Springler-verlag 1993.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    R. Studer, H. Eriksson, J.H. Gennari, S.W. Tu, D. Fensel & M. Musen, Ontologies and the Configuration of Problem-Solving Methods, proceedings of (KAW'96), 9–14, 1996.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    A. Tchounikine, Activité dans les bases de données objets: le concept de Schéma Actif, thèse, University of paul sabatier, (in French)Toulouse 1993.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    A. Valente, J. Breuker & B. Bredeweg, Integrating Modelling Approaches in the CommonKADS Library, In proceedings of the AISB93, 121–130, IOS Press, Amterdam, 1993.Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    G. Van Heijst, A.Th Shreiber & B.J Wielinga, Using explicit ontologies in KBS development, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 46(2/3): 128–292, 1997.Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    B. Wielinga, A. Schreiber & J. Breuker, KADS: A Modelling Approch to Knowledge Engineering.Knowledge Acquisition. 4, 5–53. 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Karima Messaadia
    • 1
  • Mourad Oussalah
    • 1
  1. 1.Parc scientifique Georges BesseLGI2P/EMA-EERIEPNimesFrance

Personalised recommendations