OIL ontology inference and interchange. On-To-Knowledge2 Topics for this presentation OIL as a common core language (4) aspects of OIL (5) OIL on the.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Ontology-Based Computing Kenneth Baclawski Northeastern University and Jarg.
Advertisements

W3C and RDF. Why OCLC is a W3C Member Access to networked information resources –the browser and online access –the breath and depth of networked information.
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.
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
RDF and XML tutorial. 2 Talk Overview Semantic Web XML RDF DAML + OIL ( Time permitting)
CS570 Artificial Intelligence Semantic Web & Ontology 2
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.
1 Semantic Web Technologies: The foundation for future enterprise systems Okech Odhiambo Knowledge Systems Research Group Strathmore University.
RDF Briefing Frank van Harmelen Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
DAML+OIL is not Enough Sean Bechhofer, Ian Horrocks, Carole Goble Information Management Group University of Manchester, UK Semantic.
Using the Semantic Web to Construct an Ontology- Based Repository for Software Patterns Scott Henninger Computer Science and Engineering University of.
Ontology Notes are from:
Chapter 8: Web Ontology Language (OWL) Service-Oriented Computing: Semantics, Processes, Agents – Munindar P. Singh and Michael N. Huhns, Wiley, 2005.
Ontology and Ontology-Based Applications C. Farkas Some of the slides were obtained from presentations of Ian Horrocks.
Semantic Web Tools for Authoring and Using Analysis Results Richard Fikes Robert McCool Deborah McGuinness Sheila McIlraith Jessica Jenkins Knowledge Systems.
COMP 6703 eScience Project Semantic Web for Museums Student : Lei Junran Client/Technical Supervisor : Tom Worthington Academic Supervisor : Peter Strazdins.
From SHIQ and RDF to OWL: The Making of a Web Ontology Language
OIL: An Ontology Infrastructure for the Semantic Web D. Fensel, F. van Harmelen, I. Horrocks, D. L. McGuinness, P. F. Patel-Schneider Presenter: Cristina.
Nancy Ide Vassar College USA Resource Definition Framework A Tutorial EUROLAN 2003 July 28 - August 8 Bucharest - Romania.
Aidministrator nederland b.v. Adding formal semantics to the Web Jeen Broekstra, Michel Klein, Stefan Decker, Dieter Fensel,
Copyright © 1997 Pangea Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. OIL: A Slick way to represent knowledge on the web Carole Goble, Ian Horrocks University of.
Knowledge Representation Ontology are best delivered in some computable representation Variety of choices with different: –Expressiveness The range of.
Of 39 lecture 2: ontology - basics. of 39 ontology a branch of metaphysics relating to the nature and relations of being a particular theory about the.
1 Representing Data with XML September 27, 2005 Shawn Henry with slides from Neal Arthorne.
OWL Capturing Semantic Information using a Standard Web Ontology Language Aditya Kalyanpur Jennifer Jay Banerjee James Hendler Presented By Rami Al-Ghanmi.
Dept. Computer Science, Korea Univ. Intelligent Information System Lab. 1 Sohn Jong-Soo Intelligent Information System lab. Department of Computer Science.
CS3352 Metadata The Semantic Web Directories and Thesauri XML is not enough Topic maps RDF.
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.
1 Sean Bechhofer Information Management Group University of Manchester, UK Reasoning: Who Gives a Hoot?
Michael Eckert1CS590SW: Web Ontology Language (OWL) Web Ontology Language (OWL) CS590SW: Semantic Web (Winter Quarter 2003) Presentation: Michael Eckert.
Towards a semantic web Philip Hider. This talk  The Semantic Web vision  Scenarios  Standards  Semantic Web & RDA.
Semantic Web - an introduction By Daniel Wu (danielwujr)
Advanced topics in software engineering (Semantic web)
RDF & RDF Schema Machine Understandable Metadata for the Web Semantic Web - Spring 2006 Computer Engineering Department Sharif University of Technology.
Ontology-Based Computing Kenneth Baclawski Northeastern University and Jarg.
SKOS. Ontologies Metadata –Resources marked-up with descriptions of their content. No good unless everyone speaks the same language; Terminologies –Provide.
Metadata Schema for CERIF Andrei Lopatenko Vienna University of Technology
1 Artificial Intelligence Applications Institute Centre for Intelligent Systems and their Applications Stuart Aitken Artificial Intelligence Applications.
Of 35 lecture 5: rdf schema. of 35 RDF and RDF Schema basic ideas ece 627, winter ‘132 RDF is about graphs – it creates a graph structure to represent.
Artificial Intelligence 2004 Ontology
DAML+OIL: an Ontology Language for the Semantic Web.
The future of the Web: Semantic Web 9/30/2004 Xiangming Mu.
OIL and DAML+OIL: Ontology Languages for the Semantic Web Sungshin Lim TOWARDS THE SEMANTIC WEB: Ontology-driven Knowledge.
Of 33 lecture 1: introduction. of 33 the semantic web vision today’s web (1) web content – for human consumption (no structural information) people search.
Extensible Ontological Modeling Framework for Subject Mediation L. A. Kalinichenko, N. A. Skvortsov Institute for Problems of Informatics, RAS
Metadata : an overview XML and Educational Metadata, SBU, London, 10 July 2001 Pete Johnston UKOLN, University of Bath Bath, BA2 7AY UKOLN is supported.
Description of Information Resources: RDF/RDFS (an Introduction)
The Semantic Web Riccardo Rosati Dottorato in Ingegneria Informatica Sapienza Università di Roma a.a. 2006/07.
Representing Data with XML February 26, 2004 Neal Arthorne.
The Semantic Web and Ontology. The Semantic Web WWW: –syntactic transmission of information –only processible by human – no semantic conservation of the.
Motivation Dynamically identify and understand information sources Provide interoperability between agents in a semantic manner Enable distributed extensible.
A Portrait of the Semantic Web in Action Jeff Heflin and James Hendler IEEE Intelligent Systems December 6, 2010 Hyewon Lim.
ONION Ontologies In Ontology Community of Practice Leader
Stefan Decker Stanford University Mike Dean BBN Technologies.
Semantic web course – Computer Engineering Department – Sharif Univ. of Technology – Fall RDF & RDF Schema Machine Understandable Metadata for the.
WonderWeb. Ontology Infrastructure for the Semantic Web. IST Project Review Meeting, 11 th March, WP2: Tools Raphael Volz Universität.
W3C’s (world wide web consortium) Semantic Web: - RDF and metadata markup efforts to represent data in a machine understandable form. DARPA started the.
06 Dec Rev. 14 Dec CmpE 583 Fall 2008 OWL Language 1 OWL Language off Lacy Ch. 10 Atilla Elçi.
OWL (Ontology Web Language and Applications) Maw-Sheng Horng Department of Mathematics and Information Education National Taipei University of Education.
Building Trustworthy Semantic Webs
ece 627 intelligent web: ontology and beyond
Semantic Web - Ontologies
Grid Computing 7700 Fall 2005 Lecture 18: Semantic Grid
ece 720 intelligent web: ontology and beyond
Grid Computing 7700 Fall 2005 Lecture 18: Semantic Grid
Presentation transcript:

OIL ontology inference and interchange

On-To-Knowledge2 Topics for this presentation OIL as a common core language (4) aspects of OIL (5) OIL on the Web l Why XML is not enough (3) l Why RDF(S) is not enough (9) l OIL as RDF(S) extension (3) WP1 results & plans (4)

On-To-Knowledge3 Remember: Ontologies are crucial for KM “consensual and formal specifications of conceptualisations” provide a “shared understanding of a domain for communication across people and systems” “consensual and formal specifications of conceptualisations” provide a “shared understanding of a domain for communication across people and systems”

Place in the project WP 1: l tools for ontology construction and interchange l foundational to all three layers of On-To-Knowledge architecture WP1.1= ontology language Partners = VU + AIdministrator Deliverable 1= ontology language version 1 user repository source info ontologies

Requirements for a common core Ontology-language Well defined syntax (pretty obvious) l read ontologies Well defined semantics l often overlooked but equally important l process (“understand”) ontologies Expressive enough l to capture many ontologies Easy mapping l to/from other ontology languages Efficient reasoning support

Why Reasoning Support? Reasoning support is key feature of OIL-core Important l as design support tool l for large ontologies l with multiple authors l for integrating and sharing ontologies Because it allows to l Establish inter-ontology relationships l Check for consistency l Check for (unexpected) implied relationships Shown useful for DB schema integration

Ingredients for a common core Frame Based Languages l intuitive for many users l Extensive set of modelling primitives l OKBC, OKBC-lite, XOL (Description) Logic-based languages l negation and disjunction (e.g disjointness) l properties for slots/relations e.g. transitivity for contained-in l Formal semantics l Reasoning support inconsistency-detection, implicit superclass-detection

On-To-Knowledge8 Proposed common core: OIL Based on standard frame languages (OKBC) l restricts & extends Has both XML and RDF(S) based syntax formalised by DL style logical constructs Still has frame “look and feel” Can still function as a basic frame language OIL core language restricted to allow: l reasoning support l No constructs with ill defined semantics OIL WWW DL Frames

On-To-Knowledge9 OIL: Restricts Frame Languages No defaults limited axioms/rules only definition of ontology (not individuals) Main reasons for this: Reasoning support Semantics OIL WWW DL Frames

On-To-Knowledge10 OIL: Extends Frame Languages Classes can be primitive (nec. conditions) l elephant  animal that has-colour grey or defined (nec. and sufficient conditions) l vegetarian  person who eats meat nor fish Classes allowed in slot constraints l slot-constraint eats has-value meat (eats some meat) l slot-constraint eats value-type meat (eats only meat) OIL WWW DL Frames

OIL: Extends Frame Languages Can use arbitrary class expressions instead of only class names l slot-constraint eats value-type NOT ( OR meat fish) Cardinality constraints can include value-types l slot-constraint eats max-cardinality 1 plant Supports sub-slot relation l daughter-of sub-slot of child-of Slot properties l transitive (e.g., part-of ) l symmetrical (e.g., connected-to) OIL WWW DL Frames

On-To-Knowledge12 OIL has a Formal semantics Defined by mapping to very expressive DL l slot-constraint eats has-value meat, fish =  eats:meat   eats:fish Mapping is used to provide reasoning support from a DL system (e.g., FaCT) OIL WWW DL Frames

OIL (explained by example) class-def animal% animals are a class class-def plant% plants are a class subclass-of NOT animal% that is disjoint from animals class-def tree subclass-of plant% trees are a type of plants class-def branch slot-constraint is-part-of% branches are parts of some tree has-value tree max-cardinality 1 class-def defined carnivore% carnivores are animals subclass-of animal slot-constraint eats % that eat any other animals value-type animal class-def defined herbivore % herbivores are animals subclass-of animal, NOT carnivore % that are not carnivores, and slot-constraint eats % they eat plants or parts of plants value-type plant OR (slot-constraint is-part-of has-value plant)

On-To-Knowledge14 How to put ontologies on the Web (internet, intranet, extranet) XML HTML XHTML SMIL RDF(S) PICS Declarative Languages (OIL, DAML-O) DC The W3C hierarchy of languages:

On-To-Knowledge15 XML: Document = labelled tree course teachertitlestudents namehttp DTD: simple grammars to describe legal trees So: why not use XML to represent ontologies ? node = label + attr/values + contents

On-To-Knowledge16 XML: limitations for semantic markup XML makes no commitment on:  Domain specific ontological vocabulary  Ontological modelling primitives  requires pre-arranged agreement on  &  Only feasible for closed collaboration l agents in a small & stable community l pages on a small & stable intranet not for sharable Web-resources

On-To-Knowledge17 Remember the W3C vision XML HTML XHTML SMIL RDF(S) PIC Declarative Languages OIL DC

On-To-Knowledge18 RDF(S): general background Intended for representation “meta-data”, basis for Web-based ontology-language W3C recommendation “Because it’s there”: l pushed hard by W3C (TBL Himself) l basis of $ 80M DAML program l Already embraced by some vendors (Netscape)

On-To-Knowledge19 Bluffer’s guide to RDF (1) Object --Attribute-> Value triples objects are web-resources Value is again an Object: l triples can be linked l data-model = graph pers05 ISBN... Author-of pers05 ISBN... MIT ISBN... Publ- by Author-of Publ- by

On-To-Knowledge20 Bluffer’s guide to RDF (2) Object --Attribute-> Value triples l objects are web-resources l triples can be linked l data-model = graph Any statement can be an object l graphs can be nested pers05 ISBN... Author-of NYT claims

On-To-Knowledge21 Bluffer’s guide to RDF Schema So, RDF : l (very small) commitment to modelling primitives l but: no commitment to domain vocabulary  RDF Schema Define vocabulary for RDF Organise this vocabulary in a typed hierarchy l Class, SubClassOf, type l Property, subPropertyOf, l domain, range

Bluffer’s guide to RDF(S) RDF Statement = Object - Attribute -Value triple Values can be objects (chaining) Statements can be objects (reification) RDF Statement = Object - Attribute -Value triple Values can be objects (chaining) Statements can be objects (reification) RDF Schema Define domain-specific vocabulary for OAV’s Type-hierarchy for this vocabulary using l Class, SubClassOf, type l Property, subPropertyOf, l domain, range RDF Schema Define domain-specific vocabulary for OAV’s Type-hierarchy for this vocabulary using l Class, SubClassOf, type l Property, subPropertyOf, l domain, range

RDF Schema syntax in XML

On-To-Knowledge24 RDF: to represent “meta-data” RDF-S: to define vocabulary for RDF RDF is data-model + syntax l only a very weak semantic interpretation l no inference model RDF-S goes a step further, but still l no precisely described meaning l no inference model

Quote from Ora Lassila (RDF) Future: We Need More! Structural modeling obviously not enough l we need a “logic layer” on top of RDF l some type of description logic is a possibility (after all, we are talking about frame systems) Exposing a wide variety of data sources as RDF is useful, particularly if we have logic/rules which allow us to draw inference from this data My proposal: RDF + DL = “Frame System for WWW” l this is probably a good starting point for DAML as well (details to be worked out by this workshop) Future: We Need More! Structural modeling obviously not enough l we need a “logic layer” on top of RDF l some type of description logic is a possibility (after all, we are talking about frame systems) Exposing a wide variety of data sources as RDF is useful, particularly if we have logic/rules which allow us to draw inference from this data My proposal: RDF + DL = “Frame System for WWW” l this is probably a good starting point for DAML as well (details to be worked out by this workshop)

On-To-Knowledge26 Quote from Henry Thompson “The Semantic Web needs a logic on top” NB: “a” logic= the box with the crank  FOL OIL = modelling primitives from frames (OKBC-lite) + semantics and inference from Description Logic + syntax from RDF(S) & XML(S) OIL WWW DL Frames

On-To-Knowledge27 OIL for the Semantic Web XML HTML XHTML SMIL RDF PIC Declarative Languages OIL, DAML-O DC OIL WWW DL Frames

On-To-Knowledge28 OIL as RDF(S) extension (1/2) <rdf:type rdf:resource=” /#DefinedClass”/>

OIL as RDF(S) extension (2/2) class-def subclass-of slot-def subslot-of domain range class-def subclass-of slot-def subslot-of domain range class-expressions AND, OR, NOT slot-constraints has-value, value-type cardinality slot-properties trans, symm class-expressions AND, OR, NOT slot-constraints has-value, value-type cardinality slot-properties trans, symm RDF(S) OIL

On-To-Knowledge31 OIL as the basis for DAML-O DAML = $80M DARPA program for Semantic Web Ontologies are regarded as fundamental first version of DAML-O out < end 2000 mandatory use for all DAML participants (W3C, Stanford, ISI, Lockheed, MIT, Nokia,...) OIL is used as the basis for DAML-O

On-To-Knowledge32 WP1: Results (1/2) Definition of language l semantics l XML encoding l RDF encoding 10 publications l EKAW, ECAI-WS, IEEE-IC, DL, KRDB, eBeW already take-up in work by others Madrid, Bremen, IBROW, Boeing,Daimler-Chrysler,... collaboration with DAML

On-To-Knowledge33 WP1: results (2/2) translators (Java, XSL-based): l XML OIL  FaCT l XML OIL  RDFS OIL case-studies l GIS ontology mapping l (KA) 2 ontology l CIA world fact book

OIL: currently available tools Definition of language l semantics l XML encoding l RDF encoding Tools: l translators (XSL based) l reasoner (FaCT, DL-based) l OntoEdit, OILed case-studies l GIS ontology mapping l (KA) 2 ontology l CIA world fact book

On-To-Knowledge35 OIL: some collaborating parties EU academics l University of Bremen l Univ. of A’dam l OU-UK l Univ. Manchester l A’dam Medical Centre EU IST Projects l IBROW l Comma l C-Web US academics: l Univ. of Stanford (DB, KSL, Med.Inf) l Univ. of Maryland l SRI outside academia l W3C (RDF Working group) l DARPA (DAML initiative) Industrials: l Boeing l Daimler-Chrysler l Interprice

On-To-Knowledge36 OIL: current & future work Layered approach to anguage extensions RDF(S)  OIL-lite  Standard OIL  OIL layer 1 ... l axioms, concrete domains, modules, defaults,... Ontology construction Ontology evolution Ontology mapping