OWL 2 Web Ontology Language. Topics Introduction to OWL Usage of OWL Problems with OWL 1 Solutions from OWL 2.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
OWL 1.1 Design Decisions OWL 1.1 Draft Team. 2/15 Contents General Design Principles Structural Specification Expressivity Enhancements Metamodeling Anonymous.
Advertisements

Ontologies and Databases Ian Horrocks Information Systems Group Oxford University Computing Laboratory.
1 ISWC-2003 Sanibel Island, FL IMG, University of Manchester Jeff Z. Pan 1 and Ian Horrocks 1,2 {pan | 1 Information Management.
Three Theses of Representation in the Semantic Web
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
Chronos: A Tool for Handling Temporal Ontologies in Protégé
RDF Schemata (with apologies to the W3C, the plural is not ‘schemas’) CSCI 7818 – Web Technologies 14 November 2001 Van Lepthien.
Semantic Web Thanks to folks at LAIT lab Sources include :
An Introduction to RDF(S) and a Quick Tour of OWL
CS570 Artificial Intelligence Semantic Web & Ontology 2
Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation Web Ontology Language (OWL) Feroz Farazi.
SIG2: Ontology Language Standards WebOnt Briefing Ian Horrocks University of Manchester, UK.
Of 27 lecture 7: owl - introduction. of 27 ece 627, winter ‘132 OWL a glimpse OWL – Web Ontology Language describes classes, properties and relations.
Chapter 8: Web Ontology Language (OWL) Service-Oriented Computing: Semantics, Processes, Agents – Munindar P. Singh and Michael N. Huhns, Wiley, 2005.
CSE 428 Semantic Web Topics OWL Jeff Heflin Lehigh University.
OWL Datatypes: Design and Implementation Boris Motik and Ian Horrocks University of Oxford.
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.
The Semantic Web – WEEK 5: RDF Schema + Ontologies The “Layer Cake” Model – [From Rector & Horrocks Semantic Web cuurse]
1 Draft of a Matchmaking Service Chuang liu. 2 Matchmaking Service Matchmaking Service is a service to help service providers to advertising their service.
1 Conceptual Modeling of Topic Maps with ORM Versus UML Are D. Gulbrandsen The XML group, Center for Information Technology Services, University of Oslo,
From SHIQ and RDF to OWL: The Making of a Web Ontology Language
An Introduction to Description Logics. What Are Description Logics? A family of logic based Knowledge Representation formalisms –Descendants of semantic.
1 MASWS Multi-Agent Semantic Web Systems: OWL Stephen Potter, CISA, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
8/11/2011 Web Ontology Language (OWL) Máster Universitario en Inteligencia Artificial Mikel Egaña Aranguren 3205 Facultad de Informática Universidad Politécnica.
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.
2004 Open Forum for eBusiness and Metadata Technology Standardization Metamodel Framework for Ontology Keqing He, Yixin Jing, Yangfan He State Key Laboratory.
OWL 2 Web Ontology Language: New Features and Rationale Feroz Farazi
Michael Eckert1CS590SW: Web Ontology Language (OWL) Web Ontology Language (OWL) CS590SW: Semantic Web (Winter Quarter 2003) Presentation: Michael Eckert.
An Introduction to Description Logics (chapter 2 of DLHB)
Advanced topics in software engineering (Semantic web)
Ontology-Based Computing Kenneth Baclawski Northeastern University and Jarg.
1 Artificial Intelligence Applications Institute Centre for Intelligent Systems and their Applications Stuart Aitken Artificial Intelligence Applications.
Artificial Intelligence 2004 Ontology
DAML+OIL: an Ontology Language for the Semantic Web.
OilEd An Introduction to OilEd Sean Bechhofer. Topics we will discuss Basic OilEd use –Defining Classes, Properties and Individuals in an Ontology –This.
Ontology Engineering Lab #5 – September 30, 2013.
® A Proposed UML Profile For EXPRESS David Price Seattle ISO STEP Meeting October 2004.
Description of Information Resources: RDF/RDFS (an Introduction)
OWL & Protege Introduction Dongfang Xu Ph.D student, School of Information, University of Arizona Sept 10, 2015.
Practical RDF Chapter 12. Ontologies: RDF Business Models Shelley Powers, O’Reilly SNU IDB Lab. Taikyoung Kim.
ONTOLOGY ENGINEERING Lab #2 – September 8,
ONTOLOGY ENGINEERING Lab #3 – September 15,
Of 38 lecture 6: rdf – axiomatic semantics and query.
CS621 : Artificial Intelligence Pushpak Bhattacharyya CSE Dept., IIT Bombay Lecture 12 RDF, OWL, Minimax.
ece 627 intelligent web: ontology and beyond
ONTOLOGY ENGINEERING Lab #4 - September 22, 2014.
Motivation Dynamically identify and understand information sources Provide interoperability between agents in a semantic manner Enable distributed extensible.
Ontology Engineering Lab #4 - September 23, 2013.
CSE 428 Semantic Web Topics OWL Jeff Heflin Lehigh University.
Web Ontology Language (OWL). OWL The W3C Web Ontology Language (OWL) is a Semantic Web language designed to represent rich and complex knowledge about.
OWL W3C WORKING GROUP F2F MEETING M. Vacura. OWL 2  OWL 2 extends the OWL 1.0 with a small but useful set of features that have been requested by users,
OWL Web Ontology Language Summary IHan HSIAO (Sharon)
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,
OWL (Ontology Web Language and Applications) Maw-Sheng Horng Department of Mathematics and Information Education National Taipei University of Education.
Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation
Building Trustworthy Semantic Webs
Semantic Web Foundations
Online Laptop Shop through Semantic Web
Ontology.
ece 720 intelligent web: ontology and beyond
Service-Oriented Computing: Semantics, Processes, Agents
Ontology.
Ontologies and Databases
Description Logics.
Knowledge Representation Part VII Protégé / RDFS / OWL / ++
Presentation transcript:

OWL 2 Web Ontology Language

Topics Introduction to OWL Usage of OWL Problems with OWL 1 Solutions from OWL 2

OWL Introduction Initially focus was on RDF and RDF Schema OWL is a family of three language variants 1. OWL Lite 2. OWL DL 3. OWL Full OWL is a standardized language.

Usage of OWL OWL Ontologies are used in areas such as e-Science, medicine, biology, geography, astronomy, defense, automotive and aerospace industries. OWL is extensively used in life sciences community.

Problems in OWL 1 Expressivity Issues Problems with syntax Deficiencies in the definition

Expressivity Limitations Lacks several constructs Community users introduced various patterns Still Incomplete Problem with 1) Qualified Cardinality Restriction 2) Relational Expressivity 3) Data type Expressivity 4) Keys

1) Qualified Cardinality Restriction(QCR) Ex: “Persons that have at least one child who is male” --- existential restriction (qualified) Ex: “Person with at least 3 children who are male”--- cardinality restriction(not qualified) Some situations where QCR is used i) Define a quadruped animal with exactly 4 parts that are legs. ii) Medical Committee consisting of at least 5 members, 2 are medically qualified, 1 is manager and 2 are public members QCR was used in DAML + OIL---predecessor of OWL

2)Relational Expressivity Propagation along properties Ex: “Abnormality of a part of an anatomical structure constitutes an abnormality of the structure as a whole”. Properties of Properties Ex: “If x is part of y and y is part of z then x is part of z” reflexive(every object is a part of itself) asymmetric (nothing is a part of one of its parts).

Data type Expressivity “British citizen must have a passport number which is an xsd: string” We cannot express 1) restrictions to a subset of datatype values 2) relationships between values of data properties on one object 3) relationships between values of data properties on different objects 4)aggregate functions

4) Keys OWL DL does not support Key Constraints on data properties. Ex: “US Citizens are uniquely identified by their SSN” This is not possible OWL Full supports this using inverse functional properties.

2) Syntax Issues OWL 1 uses 2 types of syntax 1. Abstract Syntax 2. OWL 1 RDF Both are difficult to parse.

1) Frame-Based Paradigm Axiom Ex: “Tiger is a Class and it is a subclass of Class Cat” Class(Tiger partial Cat) “Class Tiger is a subclass of Class Predator” Adding, SubClassOf(Tiger Predator) Ans: Cat and Predator

2) Alignment with DL Constructs DL allows only one class to appear in property restriction Ex: restriction( hasParent SomeValuesFrom(Person) allValuesFrom(Person)) This can be translated into intersectionOf( restriction(hasParent SomeValuesFrom(Person)) restriction(hasParent allValuesFrom(Person))

3) Types of Ontology Entities Ex: class(Person partial restriction(hasMother SomeValuesFrom(Woman)) Ex: DisjointClasses(Animal Plant) SubClassOf(Human Animla)

4) Problems with OWL 1 RDF Information is represented in triples Ex: A is UNION of B and C (A, owl:unionOf, _:x1) (_:x1, rdf:first, B) (_:x1, rdf:rest, _:x2) (_:x2, rdf:first, C) (_:x2, rdf:rest, rdf:nil) This is difficult to read

Metamodeling Ex: “Harry is an Eagle” “Eagles are endangered species” --Individual Harry is an instance of Class Eagle --Individual Eagle id an instance of Class Endangered Species. Eagle is Individual in one and Class in the another.

Imports and Versioning Imports one ontology from another URI must point to the location of imported ontology and the location should match with the name of imported ontology. Coupling of names and location is not possible when ontologies are moved.

Solutions from OWL 2 1)Qualified Number Restrictions QCR is implemented in OWL 2

2) Relational Expressivity Addressed using Complex Property Inclusion Axioms Ex: “If a contains b and b has a part c, then a also contains c” subPropertyOf( Propertychain(contains hasPart) contains) Ex: “If b is part of a and b contains c, then c is also a part of a” subProperty( Propertychain(hasPart hasPart) hasPart) ---Cycle of dependency between contains and hasPart OWL 2 supports transitive, reflexive and asymmetric.

3) Increasing Data type Expressivity OWL 2 supports owl:boolean, owl:string, xsd:integer, xsd:dateTime, xsd:hexBinary Build new data types by providing data type restriction construct. Ex: DatatypeRestriction(xsd:integer xsd:minInclusive 18)

4) Keys OWL 2 implements Easy Keys. Key Axioms are of the form HashKey(C P1,……Pn) This states that object or data type properties Pi are keys for instance of Class C. No two instances of C can coincide on values of Pi. Ex: HashKey(Person hasSSN)

2 assertions can be made PropertyAssertion(PSmith hasSSN “ ”) PropertyAssertion(PeterSmith hasSSN “ ”) ---Psmith and PeterSmith are same individuals. Easy Keys are not applied to individuals not known by name Ex: Jane is connected through marriedTo to an individual x that is an instance of Man and that has “ ” as the value of hasSSN.

ClassAssertion( SomeValuesFrom(marriedTo IntersectionOf( Man HasValue(hasSSN “ ”))) Jane) --We cannot conclude that ClassAssertion(Man Psmith)

MOF Metamodel It is a meta language and used for specifying other languages. It is also a Structural Specification presented using UML.

Typing and Declarations Ex: Declaration(Class(Plant)) Declaration(Class(Animal)) SubPropertyOf(P Q) Both P and Q must be declared, otherwise we cannot conclude whether they are objects or data type properties.

Metamodeling with Punning Ex: “Eagles are endangered species” “Harry is an Eagle” ClassAssertion(Eagle Harry) ClassAssertion(Endangered Eagle) This can be interpreted in OWL 2 as ClassAssertion(Class-Eagle Individual-Harry) ClassAssertion(Class-Endangered Individual-Eagle) ---This type of meta modeling is referred as Punning.

Annotation of Axiom Ex: “Humans are animals and attributes that statement to Peter” SubClassOf( Annotation(attributedTo “Peter”) Human Animal) ---Annotations do not affect the semantics of ontology but they do affect the structural equivalence. SubClassOf(Human Animal) This is semantically equivalent to the above one but not structurally.

Imports and Versioning OWL 2 allows redirection mechanism. OWL 2 contains Version URI which identifies the version of the ontology.

Conclusion Apart from addressing problems in OWL 1, goal of OWL 2 is to provide a robust platform for future development.

THANK YOU