1. Nikolay A. Skvortsov Institute for Informatics Problems Russian Academy of Sciences nskv@ipi.ac.ru http://synthesis.ipi.ac.ru/ RCDL’2008 Dubna Application of upper ontology for information model mapping

2. Information model mapping Major approach  Functions of construct mapping for particular models Commutative mapping  Based on specification refinement relation Model Unifier tool  Scalability for many heterogeneous models  Source models are mapped to the canonical model  Search for similar constructs of source and canonical models  Required extensions of canonical model core are registered  Verification of refinement between source and canonical model with extensions

3. Reference schemas of information models Specifies significant model constructs Abstract specification, independent on syntax Created from abstract syntax of model and checked by expert Includes  simple types  enumerations  abstract data types  associations (attributes of abstract data types)

4. Reference schema of OWL (spec) { Ontology; in: type; name: string; directives: {set; type_of_element: Directive} }, { Directive; in: type}, { Axiom; in: type; supertype: Directive }, { ClassAxiom; in: type; supertype: Axiom; name: string; descriptions: {set; type_of_element: Description} }, { Description; in: type}, { SubclassOf; in: type; supertype: Description; reference: Description }, { ObjectPropertyAxiom; in: type; supertype: Axiom; name: string; inverseOf: ObjectPropertyAxiom; kind: {set; type_of_element: ObjectPropertyKind}; super: {set; type_of_element: SuperProperty}; _domain: {set; type_of_element: ObjectPropertyDomain}; _range: {set; type_of_element: ObjectPropertyRange} }, { ObjectPropertyKind; in: enum; enum_list: {Functional; InverseFunctional; Simmetric ; Transitive } }

5. Reference schema of Synthesis (spec) { Module; in: type; name: string; _class_spec: {set; type_of_element: Class-Declaration}; _type: {set; type_of_element: Type-Specification} }, { Type-Specification; in: type; _supertype: {set; type_of_element: Type-Specification} }, { Abstract-Type; in: type; supertype: Type-Specification; name: string; attributes: {set; type_of_element: Abstract-Type} }, { Class-Declaration; in: type; name: string; _superclass: {set; type_of_element: Class-Declaration} }, { Attribute-Specification; in: type; name: string; attribute-type: Type-Specification; metaslot: Attribute-Metaslot }, { Association-Metaclass; in: type; supertype: Class-Declaration; _inverse: Association-Metaclass; _domain: Class-Declaration; _range: Class-Declaration; _association_type: Association-Type }

6. Upper ontology of modeling constructs Same constructs usually used in a class of models  structural  functional  object  behavioral  ontological Upper ontology specifies common principles used in a class of models Most constructs are represented as combinations of simple ones or concretization of one of them

7. The ontology of structural models R. Hull, R. King. Semantic Database Modeling: Survey, Applications, and Research Issues. ACM Computing Surveys, Vol. 19, 1987 Types  Abstract types  Printable (string, number, image)  Constructed (aggregation, grouping) Attributes (of types, metaattribute)  Argument number  Domain, range  Cardinality  Invertible, optional, multivalued, key Is-a Hierarchy (of types, of attributes)  Subset, specialization

8. The ontology of structural models (spec) { AbstractType; in: concept; supertype: AtomicType }, { ConstructedType; in: concept; supertype: _Type }, { Aggregation; in: concept; supertype: ConstructedType; components: {set; type_of_element: _Type}; arity: integer; inv: {in: predicate, invariant; { predicative: {all p/Aggregation (card(p.components = p.arity)}}} }, { Grouping; in: concept; supertype: ConstructedType; activeDomain: _Type; element: _Type }, { Attribute; in: concept; supertype: Construct; argumentNumber: integer; _domain: {set; type_of_element: _Type}; _range: {set; type_of_element: _Type}; _inverse: Attribute; minCardinality: integer; maxCardinality: integer; minInverseCardinality: integer; maxInverseCardinality: integer; isOptional: boolean; isMultivalued: boolean; isKey: boolean }, { OneArgumentAttribute; in: concept; supertype: Attribute; oneArgInv: {in: predicate, invariant; { predicative: {all p/OneArgumentAttribute (p.argumentNumber = 1)}}} }

9. Annotation of reference schemas What does the construct mean in the prospect of the ontology? Annotation of constructs in reference schema in terms of upper ontology Constructs are instances of ontological concepts or of subtypes (expressions) of ontological concepts Reference schema specifications doesn’t depend on ontological or annotating specifications

10. Annotation of reference schemas (spec) { Module; in: type, AggregationOfTwoGroups; name: string; _type: {set; type_of_element: Type-Specification}; _class_spec: {set; type_of_element: Class-Declaration} } { AggregationOfTwoGroups; in: concept; supertype: Aggregation; arityInvariant: { in: predicate, invariant; {predicative: {all p/AggregationOfTwoGroups (p.arity = 2 & all r/_Type (in(r, p.components) ->r/Grouping)) }} }

11. Reference schema integration (1) V – source schema, U – target schema Purpose: model mapping M U (V) O – upper ontology u  U, v  V,  A U,  A V – annotations, c and d are concepts or subtypes of concepts of O. – ontologically relevant pair, iff c ⊑ d VU AVAV AUAU O ⊑ M U (V)

12. Reference schema integration (2) The task in terms of ontology (abstract from reference schemas):  find all c from A U which are subtypes of a d from A V c subtype of d (c ⊑ d) iff  supertypes of c in O are subtypes of supertypes of d  types of attributes of c are subtypes of attributes of d  full invariant of c stronger than full invariant of d VU AVAV AUAU O ⊑ M U (V)

13. Reference schema integration (spec) { MetaclassAssociationConcept; in: concept; sypertype: oneArgumentAttribute; _domain: AbstractType; _range: AbstractType; _inverse: OneArgumentAttribute; } { AttributeConcept; in: concept; sypertype: oneArgumentAttribute; _domain: AbstractType; _range: _Type; _inverse: none; }

14. Application of the approach A step in any task requiring model mapping Implementation for ontology in OWL DL  Subsumption verification in Pellet Upper ontologies for different classes of models  Workflow patterns (by W. van der Aalst) for process models  DOLCE for linguistic and ontological models Model Unifier  Search for relevant constructs in the canonical model core  Search for relevant constructs in registered extensions (canonical model extension reuse)

15. Nikolay A. Skvortsov Institute for Informatics Problems Russian Academy of Sciences nskv@ipi.ac.ru http://synthesis.ipi.ac.ru/ RCDL’2008 Dubna Application of upper ontology for information model mapping