1 MASWS Multi-Agent Semantic Web Systems: OWL Stephen Potter, CISA, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Charting the Potential of Description Logic for the Generation of Referring Expression SELLC, Guangzhou, Dec Yuan Ren, Kees van Deemter and Jeff.
Advertisements

CH-4 Ontologies, Querying and Data Integration. Introduction to RDF(S) RDF stands for Resource Description Framework. RDF is a standard for describing.
An Introduction to Description Logics
RDF Schemata (with apologies to the W3C, the plural is not ‘schemas’) CSCI 7818 – Web Technologies 14 November 2001 Van Lepthien.
An Introduction to RDF(S) and a Quick Tour of OWL
April 15, 2004SPIE1 Association in Level 2 Fusion Mieczyslaw M. Kokar Christopher J. Matheus Jerzy A. Letkowski Kenneth Baclawski Paul Kogut.
Presented by Amr Ali AL-Hossary (M.B.,B.Ch)
Of 27 lecture 7: owl - introduction. of 27 ece 627, winter ‘132 OWL a glimpse OWL – Web Ontology Language describes classes, properties and relations.
OWL TUTORIAL APT CSA 3003 OWL ANNOTATOR Charlie Abela CSAI Department.
1 Ontology Language Comparisons doug foxvog 16 September 2004.
Chapter 8: Web Ontology Language (OWL) Service-Oriented Computing: Semantics, Processes, Agents – Munindar P. Singh and Michael N. Huhns, Wiley, 2005.
1 Semantic Web Technologies: The foundation for future enterprise systems Okech Odhiambo Knowledge Systems Research Group Strathmore University.
1 An Introduction To The Semantic Web. 2 Information Access on the Web Find an mp3 of a song that was on the Billboard Top Ten that features a cowbell.
Chapter 8: Web Ontology Language (OWL) Service-Oriented Computing: Semantics, Processes, Agents – Munindar P. Singh and Michael N. Huhns, Wiley, 2005.
Chapter 4 Web Ontology Language: OWL
From SHIQ and RDF to OWL: The Making of a Web Ontology Language
ANHAI DOAN ALON HALEVY ZACHARY IVES Chapter 12: Ontologies and Knowledge Representation PRINCIPLES OF DATA INTEGRATION.
Semantic Web Ontologies (continued) Expressing, Querying, Building CS 431 – April 6, 2005 Carl Lagoze – Cornell University.
A Really Brief Crash Course in Semantic Web Technologies Rocky Dunlap Spencer Rugaber Georgia Tech.
Chapter 6 Understanding Each Other CSE 431 – Intelligent Agents.
OWL: Web Ontology Language
Applying Semantics in SOA – OWL, WSDL-S. 指導教授:吳秀陽 報告人:陳建博 學號:
An Introduction to Description Logics. What Are Description Logics? A family of logic based Knowledge Representation formalisms –Descendants of semantic.
Okech Odhiambo Faculty of Information Technology Strathmore University
Protege OWL Plugin Short Tutorial. OWL Usage The world wide web is a natural application area of ontologies, because ontologies could be used to describe.
8/11/2011 Web Ontology Language (OWL) Máster Universitario en Inteligencia Artificial Mikel Egaña Aranguren 3205 Facultad de Informática Universidad Politécnica.
1 Representing Data with XML September 27, 2005 Shawn Henry with slides from Neal Arthorne.
OWL and SDD Dave Thau University of Kansas
Department of Computer Science and Engineering
Dept. Computer Science, Korea Univ. Intelligent Information System Lab. 1 Sohn Jong-Soo Intelligent Information System lab. Department of Computer Science.
Ming Fang 6/12/2009. Outlines  Classical logics  Introduction to DL  Syntax of DL  Semantics of DL  KR in DL  Reasoning in DL  Applications.
Building an Ontology of Semantic Web Techniques Utilizing RDF Schema and OWL 2.0 in Protégé 4.0 Presented by: Naveed Javed Nimat Umar Syed.
OWL 2 in use. OWL 2 OWL 2 is a knowledge representation language, designed to formulate, exchange and reason with knowledge about a domain of interest.
OWL Representing Information Using the Web Ontology Language 1.
Michael Eckert1CS590SW: Web Ontology Language (OWL) Web Ontology Language (OWL) CS590SW: Semantic Web (Winter Quarter 2003) Presentation: Michael Eckert.
LDK R Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation ClassL (part 3): Reasoning with an ABox 1.
An Introduction to Description Logics (chapter 2 of DLHB)
More on Description Logic(s) Frederick Maier. Note Added 10/27/03 So, there are a few errors that will be obvious to some: So, there are a few errors.
© O. Corcho, MC Suárez de Figueroa Baonza 1 OWL and SWRL Protégé 4: Building an OWL Ontology Mari Carmen Suárez-Figueroa, Oscar Corcho {mcsuarez,
Artificial Intelligence 2004 Ontology
OilEd An Introduction to OilEd Sean Bechhofer. Topics we will discuss Basic OilEd use –Defining Classes, Properties and Individuals in an Ontology –This.
Organization of the Lab Three meetings:  today: general introduction, first steps in Protégé OWL  November 19: second part of tutorial  December 3:
1 Enriching ebXML Registries with OWL Ontologies for Efficient Service Discovery Asuman Dogac Middle East Technical University Ankara, Turkey
Extensible Ontological Modeling Framework for Subject Mediation L. A. Kalinichenko, N. A. Skvortsov Institute for Problems of Informatics, RAS
Ontology Engineering Lab #3 – September 16, 2013.
LDK R Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation ClassL (Propositional Description Logic with Individuals) 1.
OWL & Protege Introduction Dongfang Xu Ph.D student, School of Information, University of Arizona Sept 10, 2015.
Representing Data with XML February 26, 2004 Neal Arthorne.
OWL Web Ontology Language Overview. The OWL Web Ontology Language is designed for use by applications that need to process the content of information.
Practical RDF Chapter 12. Ontologies: RDF Business Models Shelley Powers, O’Reilly SNU IDB Lab. Taikyoung Kim.
Semantic Web for the Working Ontologist Dean Allemang Jim Hendler SNU IDB laboratory.
ONTOLOGY ENGINEERING Lab #3 – September 15,
Description Logics Dr. Alexandra I. Cristea. Description Logics Description Logics allow formal concept definitions that can be reasoned about to be expressed.
ece 627 intelligent web: ontology and beyond
Motivation Dynamically identify and understand information sources Provide interoperability between agents in a semantic manner Enable distributed extensible.
W3C’s (world wide web consortium) Semantic Web: - RDF and metadata markup efforts to represent data in a machine understandable form. DARPA started the.
Web Ontology Language (OWL). OWL The W3C Web Ontology Language (OWL) is a Semantic Web language designed to represent rich and complex knowledge about.
Of 29 lecture 15: description logic - introduction.
LDK R Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation Description Logics: family of languages.
Ontology Technology applied to Catalogues Paul Kopp.
Ccs.  Ontologies are used to capture knowledge about some domain of interest. ◦ An ontology describes the concepts in the domain and also the relationships.
BBY 464 Semantic Information Management (Spring 2016) Ontologies and OWL: Web Ontology Language Yaşar Tonta & Orçun Madran [yasartonta,
Chapter Describing Individuals OWL Individuals ▫Ontological Primitive Layer  Mostly described with RDF ▫Instances of user-defined ontological.
OWL (Ontology Web Language and Applications) Maw-Sheng Horng Department of Mathematics and Information Education National Taipei University of Education.
ece 720 intelligent web: ontology and beyond
ece 720 intelligent web: ontology and beyond
Description Logics.
Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation
CIS Monthly Seminar – Software Engineering and Knowledge Management IS Enterprise Modeling Ontologies Presenter : Dr. S. Vasanthapriyan Senior Lecturer.
Presentation transcript:

1 MASWS Multi-Agent Semantic Web Systems: OWL Stephen Potter, CISA, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

2 MASWS OWL: Web Ontology Language l Description Logics have…: –…well-defined semantics; –…tractable inference algorithms. l OWL (Web Ontology Language) is… –…an ontology language based on DLs for the Semantic Web; –…a W3C standard; –…built on top of RDF (and semantically extends RDF(S)); –…expressed using an RDF/XML syntax.

3 MASWS The Description Logics Family l ALC –Sound and complete subsumption testing l ALCN –ALC + number restriction  n R l ALC R+ –ALC + transitively closed roles l SHIQ –SH family: ALC + transitive roles and role hierarchy l SHOQ(D) –Adds datatypes (D) and enumerated types to SHIQ l SHIF(D) –Adds datatypes transitive roles and role hierarchy, plus functional attributes to SHIQ (OWL-Lite) l SHOIN(D) –Adds nominals to class descriptions (oneOf {a,b,c}) and arbitrary cardinality constraints (OWL-DL)

4 MASWS OWL and the Semantic Web l XML provides document syntax; l XML Schema allows structuring of documents plus datatypes; l RDF provides a data model for talking about objects (resources) and their relationships; l RDF Schema provides a simple vocabulary for describing properties and classes of resources. l OWL provides a richer language for describing properties and classes –Eg. provides some relations between classes (such as disjointedness), characteristics of properties, cardinality, etc

5 MASWS OWL Species l OWL-Full: few restrictions on use of language constructs, but not decidable (closer to FOL). –Use if expressiveness is more important than complete reasoning. l OWL-DL: restricted version of OWL-Full, but with restrictions on the use of the language constructs to ensure decidability. Corresponds to a description logic. l OWL-Lite: a subset of OWL-DL – a simple description logic. –Use for simple class hierarchies with simple constraints; –(Provides a migration path for existing thesauri/taxonomies)

6 MASWS OWL Ontologies l OWL allows for the distributed nature of the web in several ways: –An ontology can be related to other ontologies (eg., by explicitly importing definitions). –OWL makes an open-world assumption (definitions not confined to a single scope) – something is false only if it can be proved to contradict other information in the ontology –OWL propositions are monotonic, that is, new information can never retract previous information – facts and entailments can be added, never deleted (however this new information can be contradictory). l Allows TBox (terminological statements) and ABox (assertions/individuals) to be represented.

7 MASWS Components of an OWL ontology l Classes l Properties l Individuals Thing Country Human James United Kingdom livesInCountry

8 MASWS <!DOCTYPE rdf:RDF [... ]> <rdf:RDF xmlns = " xml:base = " xmlns:owl = " First Things First l Introduce any XML namespace declarations: –Allows identifiers to be specified unambiguously –Makes the ontology more readable. An example OWL ontology Example Ontology... l Declare the ontology and any meta-information

9 MASWS OWL Classes l OWL supports a number of different ways of defining a class. l In OWL-Lite: –As a simple named class; l …and in OWL-DL: –As the intersection of other classes; –As the union of other classes; –As the complement of another class; –Using class restrictions; –By enumerating the class.

10 MASWS Named Classes If not stated, a class is assumed to be a subclass of owl:Thing : l Human ⊑ ⊤ Use rdfs:subClassOf to explicitly subclass another class: l Student ⊑ Human Thing Human Student

11 MASWS OWL Individuals l Using a class definition: l …we can now create individuals of this class: l and perhaps elsewhere provide additional information: Student James_Smith

12 MASWS OWL Properties l In DLs properties allow us to define general relationships between classes, and specific relationships between individuals. l OWL distinguishes between two types of properties: –Datatype properties describe relationships between individuals of some class and RDF literals or XML Schema datatypes. –Object properties describe relationships between individuals of two classes. Range Domain Property relationship

13 MASWS OWL Properties l Eg: – : hasName l Eg: – : livesInCountry

14 MASWS Property Characteristics l In addition, a property can be defined to be: –FunctionalProperty : a given individual has only one value of the property (eg. hasDateOfBirth). –InverseFunctionalProperty : the inverse of the property is functional (eg. birthDateOf). –SymmetricProperty : if a property relates x to y, then it can be inferred that it relates y to x (eg. nextTo). –TransitiveProperty : if a property relates x to y, and y to z, then it can also be inferred that it relates x to z (eg. locatedIn). –subPropertyOf another property. –inverseOf : (eg. birthDateOf is inverse of hasDateOfBirth).

15 MASWS OWL-DL Classes l OWL supports a number of different ways of defining a class. l In OWL-Lite: –As a simple named class; l …and in OWL-DL: –Using property restrictions; –As the intersection of other classes; –As the union of other classes; –As the complement of another class; –By enumerating the class.

16 MASWS Property Restrictions l Property Restrictions define a class of individuals based on the nature and/or number of relationships in which they participate. l Restrictions can be considered to fall into three groups: –Quantifier restrictions ( someValuesFrom, allValuesFrom ). –Cardinality restrictions ( cardinality, minCardinallity, maxCardinality ). –hasValue restriction.

17 MASWS someValuesFrom Restriction The ‘existential’ restriction ( ∃ ). l Read as ‘has some values from’ or ‘at least one’. l Describes the class of individuals that have at least one kind of relationship along the specified property with an individual that is a member of a specified class. So: ∃R.C defines the class of individuals that are in at least one relationship R with an individual of class C. So: ∃eats.Plant defines the class of individuals that eat some/at least one (individuals from the set of) Plants. { x | ∃y.(eats(x,y) ⋀ Plant(y)) }

18 MASWS someValuesFrom Restriction Plant ∃eats.Plant eats eats

19 MASWS allValuesFrom Restriction The ‘universal’ restriction ( ∀ ). l Read as “has all values from” or “only”. l Describes the class of individuals that if they are in a particular relationship along the specified property, it is only with individuals that are a member of the specified class. So: ∀R.C defines the class of individuals that, if they are in relationship R, it is only with individuals of class C. So: ∀eats.Plant defines the class of individuals that, if they eat anything, they eat only (individuals from the set of) Plants. l { x | ∀y.(eats(x,y) → Plant(y)) } eats(a,b)Plant(b)→ false true falsetrue false true

20 MASWS allValuesFrom Restriction Plant ∀eats.Plant eats eats

21 MASWS Cardinality Restrictions l For a given property, cardinality restrictions allow us to define the number of relationships that individuals of a class participate in: –cardinality ("exactly"), minCardinality ("at least"), maxCardinality ("at most"). –Restricted to values of 0 and 1in OWL-Lite (positive integers allowed in OWL-DL). 1 Note: stronger than a functionalProperty :...every student has exactly one matric. number

22 MASWS hasValue Restrictions hasValue restrictions allow us to define the class of individuals which have a particular property relationship with a particular individual. Country livesInCountry ∋ UnitedKindom livesInCountry UnitedKindom France

23 MASWS Intersection of Classes: intersectionOf l Class defined as the intersection of two or more classes: l Woman ≡ Human ⊓ Female l (Could use more complicated class definitions.) Female Human

24 MASWS Union of Classes: unionOf l Class defined as the union of two or more classes: l Parent ≡ Father ⊔ Mother Father Mother

25 MASWS Complement Classes: complementOf l Class defined as the complement of another class: l Childless ≡ ¬ Parent Parent Childless

26 MASWS Enumerated Classes: oneOf l An enumerated class is specified by explicitly and exhaustively listing the individuals that are members of the class. HolidayDestinations Greece Spain Italy

27 MASWS Disjointness: disjointWith l Specifying disjointness ensures that a member of one class is not also a member of any disjoint class. l ie., An animal cannot also be a plant nor a mineral. l Note: this does not imply that Plant and Mineral are also disjoint - we need to say this explicitly!

28 MASWS Equivalences l We can say that a class (property, individual) is equivalent to a second class (property, individual). –indicates that the two classes (properties) have exactly the same instances (tuples) as members. –(use equivalentProperty for properties, and owl:sameAs for individuals.) equivalentClass allows the specification of necessary and sufficent conditions for class membership ( subClassOf gives just necessary). l Can be used for relating elements of one ontology to those of another. Can also say that two individuals are differentFrom each other.

29 MASWS Ontology Versioning l OWL recognises the fact that ontologies develop over time: Also backwardCompatibleWith and incompatibleWith. l Can indicate that particular classes/properties have become deprecated. –Only in OWL-Full can you make these sorts of statements… –…and the semantics are not defined anyway

30 MASWS Reasoning in OWL-DL l For OWL-Lite and OWL-DL ontologies, we can use automated reasoners to infer information that is not explicitly stated in the ontology. l Standard reasoning 'services' include: –classification: construct class hierarchy based on definitions of the classes. –subsumption testing: does C⊑ D ? ie. do all members of set C necessarily belong to set D under all possible interpretations? –equivalence testing: does C≡D ? ie. is set C equivalent to set D under all possible interpretations? –satisfiability/consistency testing: is C consistent wrt TBox? ie. is the set C non-empty under at least one interpretation? –instance checking: is a given individual an instance of a specified class?

31 MASWS OWL Summary l OWL is a W3C standard language for specifying ontologies for the Semantic Web: –language includes some elements that support distributed ontology and knowledge base use/development. l It is layered on top of RDF and RDFS, and is based on description logics. l There are three species of OWL: OWL-Lite, OWL-DL and OWL-Full. l We can perform reasoning over ontologies written in OWL-Lite and OWL-DL.

32 MASWS Further Reading… l W3C OWL web site: – l OWL Web Ontology Language Overview: – l CO-ODE web site: –