Semantic Cooperation and Knowledge Reuse by Using Autonomous Ontologies

Several proposals have been put forward to support distributed agent cooperation in the Semantic Web, by allowing concepts and roles in one ontology be reused in another ontology. In general, these proposals reduce the autonomy of each ontology by defining the semantics of the ontology to depend on the semantics of the other ontologies. We propose a new framework for managing autonomy in a set of cooperating ontologies (or ontology space). In this framework, each language entity (concept/role/individual) in an ontology may have its meaning assigned either locally with respect to the semantics of its own ontology, to preserve the autonomy of the ontology, or globally with respect to the semantics of any neighbouring ontology in which it is defined, thus enabling semantic cooperation between multiple ontologies. In this way, each ontology has a "subjective semantics" based on local interpretation and a "foreign semantics" based on semantic binding to neighbouring ontologies. We study the properties of these two semantics and describe the conditions under which entailment and satisfiability are preserved. We also introduce two reasoning mechanisms under this framework: "cautious reasoning" and "brave reasoning". Cautious reasoning is done with respect to a local ontology and its neighbours (those ontologies in which its entities are defined); brave reasoning is done with respect to the transitive closure of this relationship. This framework is independent of ontology languages. As a case study, for Description Logic ALCN we present two tableau-based algorithms for performing each form of reasonings and prove their correctness.

[1]  Bernardo Cuenca Grau.  Modularizing OWL Ontologies , 2005 .

[2]  Michel C. A. Klein,et al.  Structure-Based Partitioning of Large Concept Hierarchies , 2004, SEMWEB.

[3]  Fausto Giunchiglia,et al.  Multilanguage hierarchical logics (or: how we can do without modal logics) , 1994, CNKBS.

[4]  Frank van Harmelen,et al.  C-OWL: Contextualizing Ontologies , 2003, SEMWEB.

[5]  Luciano Serafini,et al.  Distributed Description Logics: Assimilating Information from Peer Sources , 2003, J. Data Semant..

[6]  Fausto Giunchiglia,et al.  Local Models Semantics, or Contextual Reasoning = Locality + Compatibility , 1998, KR.

[7]  Fausto Giunchiglia,et al.  Autonomous Ontology : Operations and Semantics OR Local Semantics with Semantic Binding on Foreign Entity , 2006 .

[8]  Vasant Honavar,et al.  Towards Collaborative Environments for Ontology Construction and Sharing , 2006, International Symposium on Collaborative Technologies and Systems (CTS'06).

[9]  Alan L. Rector,et al.  Modularisation of domain ontologies implemented in description logics and related formalisms including OWL , 2003, K-CAP '03.

[10]  Jeff Z. Pan,et al.  Semantic Import: An Approach for Partial Ontology Reuse , 2006, WoMO.

[11]  Bijan Parsia,et al.  Modularity and Web Ontologies , 2006, KR.

[12]  Diego Calvanese,et al.  The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and Applications , 2003, Description Logic Handbook.

[13]  Bijan Parsia,et al.  Working with Multiple Ontologies on the Semantic Web , 2004, SEMWEB.

[14]  Laurent Perrussel,et al.  Contextual Reasoning , 1998, ECAI.

[15]  Robert Tolksdorf,et al.  Case Studies on Ontology Reuse , 2005 .

[16]  Bijan Parsia,et al.  Debugging OWL ontologies , 2005, WWW '05.

[17]  Jeffrey M. Bradshaw,et al.  Applying KAoS Services to Ensure Policy Compliance for Semantic Web Services Workflow Composition and Enactment , 2004, SEMWEB.

[18]  Bernardo Cuenca Grau,et al.  Modular Ontology Languages Revisited , 2007 .

[19]  Fausto Giunchiglia,et al.  The Semantic Web - ASWC 2006, First Asian Semantic Web Conference, Beijing, China, September 3-7, 2006, Proceedings , 2006, ASWC.