Merging of Ontologies Using Belief Revision and Defeasible Logic Programming
نویسندگان
چکیده
Ontology merging refers to the process of creating a new ontology from two or more existing ontologies with overlapping parts. The δ-ontologies framework allows to reason with possibly inconsistent Description Logic ontologies by interpreting them in Defeasible Logic Programming, which is an approach to common-sense reasoning based on defeasible argumentation and logic programming. In traditional Description Logics, the knowledge expressed by a single ontology is separated into a terminological box and an assertional box. In contrast, in a δ-ontology, the terminological box is separated into an strict box (which must always be consistent) and a defeasible box (that could be inconsistent). Merging defeasible boxes is trivial but merging strict boxes is not since its union could result in an inconsistent strict box. In this article we extend the δ-ontologies framework by combining Argumentation, Belief Revision, and Description Logic ontologies to merge two ontologies such that the union of the strict terminologies could lead to inconsistency. We base our approach on a procedure presented by Falappa et al. where part of the inconsistent terminologies are turned defeasible by using a kernel revision operator applied to the set union of the ontologies. Resumen La mezcla de ontoloǵıas se refiere al proceso de creación de una nueva ontoloǵıa a partir de dos más ontoloǵıas existentes con partes en común. El marco de las δ-ontoloǵıas permite razonar con ontoloǵıas en Lógica para la Descripción posiblemente inconsistentes al interpretarlas en Programación en Lógica Rebatible, la cual es un acercamiento al razonamiento de sentido común basado en argumentación rebatible y programación en lógica. En las Lógicas para la Descripción tradicionales, el conocimiento expresado por una ontoloǵıa simple es separado en una caja terminológica y una caja asercional. En contraste, en una δ-ontoloǵıa, la caja terminológica es separada en una caja estricta (que siempre debe ser consistente) y una caja rebatible (que podŕıa ser inconsistente). Mezclar cajas rebatibles es trivial pero mezclar cajas estrictas no lo es puesto que tal unión podŕıa resultar en una caja estricta inconsistente. En este art́ıculo, extendemos el marco de las δ-ontoloǵıas al combinar Argumentación, Revisión de Creencias y Lógicas para la Descripción para mezclar dos ontoloǵıas tales que la unión de las terminoloǵıas estrictas podŕıa llevar a inconsistencia. Basamos nuestro acercamiento en un procedimiento presentado por Falappa et al. donde parte de las terminoloǵıas inconsistentes son convertidas en rebatibles por medio de un operador de revisión de núcleo aplicado a la unión conjuntista de las ontoloǵıas.
منابع مشابه
Ontology Merging Using Belief Revision and Defeasible Logic Programming
We combine argumentation, belief revision and description logic ontologies for extending the δ-ontologies framework to show how to merge two ontologies in which the union of the strict terminologies could lead to inconsistency. To solve this problem, we revisit a procedure presented by Falappa et al. in which part of the offending terminologies are turned defeasible by using a kernel revision o...
متن کاملA Preliminary Reification of Argument Theory Change
In this article we introduce the basics for understanding the mechanisms of Argument Theory Change. In particular we reify it using Defeasible Logic Programming. In this formalism, knowledge bases are represented through defeasible logic programs. The main change operation we define over a defeasible logic program is a special kind of revision that inserts a new argument and then modifies the r...
متن کاملDynamics of knowledge in DeLP through Argument Theory Change
1 This article is devoted to the study of methods to change defeasible logic programs (de.l.p.s) which are the knowledge bases used by the Defeasible Logic Programming (DeLP) interpreter. DeLP is an argumentation formalism that allows to reason over potentially inconsistent de.l.p.s. Argument Theory Change (ATC) studies certain aspects of belief revision in order to make them suitable for abstr...
متن کاملChanging Legal Systems: Abrogation and Annulment. Part II: Temporalised Defeasible Logic
In this paper we propose a temporal extension of Defeasible Logic to model legal modifications, such as abrogation and annulment. Hence, this framework overcomes the difficulty, discussed elsewhere [7], of capturing these modification types using belief and base revision.
متن کاملEmbedding Defeasible Argumentation in the Semantic Web: an ontology-based approach
The SemanticWeb is a project intended to create a universal medium for information exchange by giving semantics to the content of documents on the Web by means of ontology definitions. Ontologies intended for knowledge representation in intelligent agents rely on common-sense reasoning formalizations. Defeasible argumentation has emerged as a successful approach to model common-sense reasoning....
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
- Inteligencia Artificial, Revista Iberoamericana de Inteligencia Artificial
دوره 16 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2013