W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sws-ig@w3.org > December 2003

Re: Cross-ontologies reasoning

From: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 12:59:28 -0500
Cc: "Ugo Corda" <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>, <public-sws-ig@w3.org>
To: Jack Berkowitz <jack.berkowitz@networkinference.com>
Message-Id: <C3996C3C-2C03-11D8-BF58-0003939E0B44@isr.umd.edu>

On Thursday, December 11, 2003, at 12:32  PM, Jack Berkowitz wrote:

> Hi Ugo,
> This idea of making deductive logical inferences across ontologies is  
> one of the principals of the OWL-DL flavor of the language.

Actually, I'll make the stronger claim that this is true for all  
flavors of OWL.

What sort of inferences OWL Full supports is a trickier question :) Via  
the LBase translation, you may well get all sorts of deductive  
inferences, assuming you can pile enough metamodeling and mapping  
axioms ontop.

>  You do it by establishing axioms that express equivalencies,  
> sub-class, or other relationships between the two ontologies (or many  
> more ontologies) and use a mechanism such as owl:import to provide a  
> linkage.  If you have an inferencing technology, then you can maintain  
> logical consistency across these relationships.  "Closeness" is a  
> matter of interpretation and can be influenced somewhat by the form of  
> the "bridge" axioms expressed.  If ontologies are far apart -- ie  
> different concepts -- the logic processor would not infer that they  
> represent the same or similar things.

There's also a fair bit beyond this in the current Description Logic  
Literature alone, e.g., concept unification and matching, concept  
approximation, Description Logics with similarity (see  
wolter-2.pdf), distributed description logics  
(http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/504663.html), and cross connections between  
kbs with differently expressive concept languages  

Aside from more or less straight forward deductive (and related)  
logical reasoning, there's some thought that "linking" between  
ontologies (and kbs, and other things) might have some useful semantic  
significance. This is a rather fluffier notion.

I'm just tipping the iceberg, of course :)

Bijan Parsia.
Received on Thursday, 11 December 2003 12:56:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:54:11 UTC