Failing Queries in Distributed Autonomous Information System

There are two basic cases when Query Answering System (QAS) for a Distributed Autonomous Information System (DAIS) may give no answer to a submitted query. Let us assume that q is that query which is submitted to an information system S representing one of the sites in DAIS. Systems in DAIS can be incomplete, have hierarchical attributes, and we also assume that there are no objects in S which descriptions are matching q. In such a case, QAS will fail and return the empty set of objects. Alternatively, it may relax query q as it was proposed in [7], [8], [2]. It means that q is replaced either automatically or with a help from user by a new more general query. Clearly, the ultimate goal is to find a generalization of q which is possibly the smallest. Smaller generalizations of queries always guarantee higher confidence in objects returned by QAS. Such QAS is called cooperative. We may also encounter failing query problem when some of the attributes listed in q are outside the domain of S. We call them foreign for S. In such a case, we extract definitions of foreign attributes for S at other sites in DAIS and next used them in QAS to solve q. However, to do that successfully, we have to assume that both systems agree on the ontology of their common attributes [14], [15], [16]. Such definitions are used to identify which objects in S may satisfy that query. The corresponding QAS is called collaborative. This paper shows that cooperation can be used as a refinement tool for the collaboration strategy dealing with failing query problem as presented in [14], [15].

[1]  Nicola Guarino,et al.  Ontologies and Knowledge Bases. Towards a Terminological Clarification , 1995 .

[2]  Arthur B. Markman,et al.  Knowledge Representation , 1998 .

[3]  Parke Godfrey,et al.  Minimization in Cooperative Response to Failing Database Queries , 1994, Int. J. Cooperative Inf. Syst..

[4]  Zbigniew W. Ras,et al.  Query Approximate Answering System for an Incomplete DKBS , 1997, Fundam. Informaticae.

[5]  Terry Gaasterland Cooperative Answering through Controlled Query Relaxation , 1997, IEEE Expert.

[6]  Bernhard Ganter,et al.  Conceptual Structures: Logical, Linguistic, and Computational Issues , 2000, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[7]  John F. Sowa,et al.  Knowledge representation: logical, philosophical, and computational foundations , 2000 .

[8]  John F. Sowa,et al.  Ontology, Metadata, and Semiotics , 2000, ICCS.

[9]  Liliana Albertazzi,et al.  Shapes of forms : from gestalt psychology and phenomenology to ontology and mathematics , 1999 .

[10]  Stuart C. Shapiro Review of Knowledge representation: logical, philosophical, and computational foundations by John F. Sowa. Brooks/Cole 2000. , 2001 .

[11]  Zbigniew W. Ras,et al.  Ontology-based distributed autonomous knowledge systems , 2004, Inf. Syst..

[12]  Nicolaas J. I. Mars,et al.  Towards very large knowledge bases, knowledge building and knowledge sharing 1995 , 1995 .

[13]  Zbigniew W. Ras,et al.  Query Answering Based on Collaboration and Chase , 2004, FQAS.

[14]  Bob J. Wielinga,et al.  Using explicit ontologies in KBS development , 1997, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[15]  Asunción Gómez-Pérez,et al.  Knowledge Management through Ontologies , 1998, PAKM.

[16]  Dieter Fensel,et al.  Ontologies: A silver bullet for knowledge management and electronic commerce , 2002 .

[17]  Hua Yang,et al.  CoBase: A scalable and extensible cooperative information system , 1996, Journal of Intelligent Information Systems.

[18]  Zdzislaw Pawlak,et al.  Information systems theoretical foundations , 1981, Inf. Syst..

[19]  Z. Pawlak Rough Sets: Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning about Data , 1991 .