Modular construction of logic knowledge bases: an algebraic approach

Abstract Modularity, reusability, extension capabilities and transformations are among the main facilities that must be considered in knowledge engineering targeted to the development of knowledge bases in the large. Moreover, fast and efficient techniques for updating, querying and inferencing with knowledge bases are also important issues. It seems that current knowledge representation approaches, namely the logic and the structural approaches, do not cope with the essential aspects that must characterize a knowledge engineer workbench. Herein, an algebraic approach allowing the modular construction of knowledge bases is proposed. The main building blocks of knowledge bases are the semantic primitives defined by theory morphisms, mappings taking knowledge bases into knowledge bases, and an interpretation functor. The application of a semantic primitive is the value of the interpretation functor for the chosen interpretations of the argument knowledge bases of the theory morphisms involved. A knowledge base becomes a structured theory from which we can retrace the respective construction sequence. Incidentally, the approach allows the description of a new architecture for knowledge engineering supporting two alternative representations of knowledge bases: a data base representation and a theory representation. Fast, concurrent and dumb updating and querying of knowledge bases can be targeted to the data base representation, whereas intelligent accesses can be directed to the theory representation. The structure of the knowledge base makes possible the selection of the relevant fragment for the purposes at hand. The E-R modeling concepts are adopted for illustrating the approach. The structuring aspects are discussed upon an E-R example of a fragment of a stock management knowledge base.

[1]  S. Maclane,et al.  Categories for the Working Mathematician , 1971 .

[2]  Cristina Sernadas,et al.  The Use of E-R Abstractions for Knowledge Representation , 1985, ER.

[3]  Joseph A. Goguen,et al.  Institutions : abstract model theory for computer science , 1985 .

[4]  Joseph A. Goguen,et al.  The Semantics of CLEAR, A Specification Language , 1979, Abstract Software Specifications.

[5]  Peter P. Chen The entity-relationship model: toward a unified view of data , 1975, VLDB '75.

[6]  John Wylie Lloyd,et al.  Foundations of Logic Programming , 1987, Symbolic Computation.

[7]  Anthony C. Klug Entity-Relationship Views over Uninterpreted Enterprise Schemas , 1979, ER.

[8]  Raymond Reiter,et al.  Towards a Logical Reconstruction of Relational Database Theory , 1982, On Conceptual Modelling.

[9]  Cristina Sernadas,et al.  Conceptual Modeling Abstraction Mechanisms as Parameterized Theories in Institutions , 1985, DS-1.

[10]  José Luiz Fiadeiro,et al.  Behavioural Aspects of Intelligent Knowledge-Based Information Systems , 1987, Temporal Aspects in Information Systems.

[11]  Rod M. Burstall,et al.  Computational category theory , 1988, Prentice Hall International Series in Computer Science.

[12]  Peter A. Ng,et al.  A Formal Definition of Entity-Relationship Models , 1979, ER.

[13]  ChenPeter Pin-Shan The entity-relationship modeltoward a unified view of data , 1976 .

[14]  Robert A. Kowalski,et al.  Logic for problem solving , 1982, The computer science library : Artificial intelligence series.

[15]  Raymond Reiter On Closed World Data Bases , 1977, Logic and Data Bases.

[16]  Richard A. Frost,et al.  Introduction to Knowledge Base Systems , 1986 .

[17]  José Luiz Fiadeiro,et al.  Structuring Theories on Consequence , 1988, ADT.

[18]  Jack Minker,et al.  Logic and Databases: A Deductive Approach , 1984, CSUR.

[19]  Cristina Sernadas,et al.  Abstraction and Inference Mechanism for Knowledge Representation , 1985, Foundations of Knowledge Base Management.