A Method of Contrastive Reasoning with Inconsistent Ontologies
نویسندگان
چکیده
Contrastive reasoning is the reasoning with contrasts which are expressed as contrary conjunctions like the word ”but” in natural language. Contrastive answers are more informative for reasoning with inconsistent ontologies, as compared with the usual simple Boolean answer, i.e., either ”yes” or ”no”. In this paper, we propose a method of computing contrastive answers from inconsistent ontologies. The proposed approach has been implemented in the system CRION (Contrastive Reasoning with Inconsistent ONtologies) as a reasoning plug-in in the LarKC (Large Knowledge Collider) platform. We report several experiments in which we apply the CRION system to some realistic ontologies. This evaluation shows that contrastive reasoning is a useful extension to the existing approaches of reasoning with inconsistent ontologies.
منابع مشابه
Contrastive Reasoning for the Semantic Web
The sentences “but” are used frequently in natural languages. However, the semantics of “but” has not yet been well studied in logic and reasoning. Contrastive reasoning is the reasoning with contrasts which are expressed as contrary conjunctions like the word ”but” in natural language. Contrastive answers are more informative for reasoning with inconsistent ontologies, as compared with the usu...
متن کاملUsing Semantic Distances for Reasoning with Inconsistent Ontologies1
Re-using and combining multiple ontologies on the Web is bound to lead to inconsistencies between the combined vocabularies. Even many of the ontologies that are in use today turn out to be inconsistent once some of their implicit knowledge is made explicit. However, robust and efficient methods to deal with inconsistencies are lacking from current Semantic Web reasoning systems, which are typi...
متن کاملA New Approach of Reasoning with Inconsistent Ontologies
Reasoning with inconsistent ontologies is to use an inconsistency reasoner to get meaningful answers from inconsistent ontologies. In this paper, we propose an improved inconsistency reasoner which selects some consistent subsets by using minimal inconsistent sets(MIS) and a resolution method to improve the run-time performance of the reasoning processing. A minimal inconsistent set contains a ...
متن کاملReasoning with Inconsistent Ontologies
In this paper we present a framework of reasoning with inconsistent ontologies, in which pre-defined selection functions are used to deal with concept relevance. We examine how the notion of ”concept relevance” can be used for reasoning with inconsistent ontologies. We have implemented a prototype called PION (Processing Inconsistent ONtologies), which is based on a syntactic relevance-based se...
متن کاملUsing Semantic Distances for Reasoning with Inconsistent Ontologies
Re-using and combining multiple ontologies on the Web is bound to lead to inconsistencies between the combined vocabularies. Even many of the ontologies that are in use today turn out to be inconsistent once some of their implicit knowledge is made explicit. However, robust and efficient methods to deal with inconsistencies are lacking from current Semantic Web reasoning systems, which are typi...
متن کامل