- From: Pascal Hitzler <pascal.hitzler@wright.edu>
- Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 20:16:32 -0400
- To: duanyucong <duanyucong@hotmail.com>
- Cc: public-owl-dev@w3.org
Check on literature concerning local closed world semantics for description logics. That's exactly about combining OWA and CWA. You'll find quite a bit. Just some pointers - the first two contain good related work sections: Adila Alfa Krisnadhi, Frederick Maier, Pascal Hitzler OWL and Rules. In: A. Polleres, C. d'Amato, M. Arenas, S. Handschuh, P. Kroner, S. Ossowski, P.F. Patel-Schneider (eds.), Reasoning Web. Semantic Technologies for the Web of Data. 7th International Summer School 2011, Galway, Ireland, August 23-27, 2011, Tutorial Lectures. Lecture Notes in Computer Science Vol. 6848, Springer, Heidelberg, 2011. To appear. Adila Krisnadhi, Kunal Sengupta, Pascal Hitzler Local Closed World Semantics: Keep it simple, stupid! In: Riccardo Rosati, Sebastian Rudolph, Michael Zakharzaschev, Proceedings of the 2011 International Workshop on Description Logics (DL2011), Barcelona, Spain, July 2011. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, Vol. 745, pp. 532-542. Kunal Sengupta, Adila Krisnadhi, Pascal Hitzler Local Closed World Reasoning: Grounded Circumscription for OWL. In: Proceedings ISWC2011. To appear. Stephan Grimm, Pascal Hitzler Semantic Matchmaking of Web Resources with Local Closed-World Reasoning. International Journal of e-Commerce 12 (2), 89-126, Winter 2007-8. - in these papers you also find pointers to work by others on this topic. The papers are available from my homepage http://www.pascal-hitzler.de/ , but it's down for maintenance this weekend. Send me an email if you want the pdfs earlier. Pascal. On 8/19/2011 3:22 AM, duanyucong wrote: > > > > > Dear all, I propose an discussion on new topic: Should Closed World > Assumption(CWA) and Open World Assumption(OWA) be integrated? My > initial argumentations: CWA vs. OWA could be interprated at serveral > levels:(1) as notations: CWA and OWA are supposed to be bound to > concepts(CPT);we also call that this argumentation is at notation > expression level.At this level, integration means simply composition > of notations. (2) as concepts: CWA and OWA are supposed to represent > the semantics of the individuals who utilize these two concepts to > construct their expressions;we also call that this argumentation is > at conceptual level (conceptual modeling);At this level, integration > actually rely on the integration of both notations and semantics. (3) > as semantics: CWA and OWA are different in the sense of existence or > ontologically.They can not be integrated since that the level of > existence is supposed to be not transcendable in an ultimate sense.We > call that this level is at semantic leve! l.At this level, > integration action will mean defying the sense of ultimate of > existence/ontology which is the inner character of semantic.Whatever > can be done at this level is to identify the order (ORD) and > classification (CLA) for the reference of conceptual modeling and > validation of compositions of notations of concepts. Sincerely, > Yucong Duan > -- Prof. Dr. Pascal Hitzler Dept. of Computer Science, Wright State University, Dayton, OH pascal@pascal-hitzler.de http://www.knoesis.org/pascal/ Semantic Web Textbook: http://www.semantic-web-book.org Semantic Web Journal: http://www.semantic-web-journal.net
Received on Saturday, 20 August 2011 00:16:53 UTC