Modular first-order ontologies via repositories

From its inception, the focus of ontological engineering has been to support the reusability and shareability of ontologies, as well as interoperability of ontology-based software systems. Among the approaches employed to address these challenges have been ontology repositories and the modularization of ontologies. In this paper we combine these approaches and use the relationships between first-order ontologies within a repository (such as non-conservative extension and relative interpretation) to characterize the criteria for modularity. In particular, we introduce the notion of core hierarchies, which are sets of theories with the same non-logical lexicons and which are all non-conservative extensions of a unique root theory. The technique of relative interpretation leads to the notion of reducibility of a theory to a set of theories in different core hierarchies. We show how these relationships support a semi-automated procedure that decomposes an ontology into irreducible modules. We also propose a semi-automated procedure that can use the relationships between modules to characterize which modules can be shared and reused among different ontologies.

[1]  Chen C. Chang,et al.  Model Theory: Third Edition (Dover Books On Mathematics) By C.C. Chang;H. Jerome Keisler;Mathematics , 1966 .

[2]  Michael Grüninger Verification of the OWL-Time Ontology , 2011, International Semantic Web Conference.

[3]  L. W. Szczerba,et al.  Interpretability of Elementary Theories , 1977 .

[4]  Boris Konev,et al.  Formal Properties of Modularisation , 2009, Modular Ontologies.

[5]  Patrick J. Hayes,et al.  A Catalog of Temporal Theories , 2005 .

[6]  Bijan Parsia,et al.  Automatic Partitioning of OWL Ontologies Using E-Connections , 2005, Description Logics.

[7]  Michael Grüninger,et al.  Verification of Time Ontologies with Points and Intervals , 2011, 2011 Eighteenth International Symposium on Temporal Representation and Reasoning.

[8]  William M. Farmer An Infrastructure for Intertheory Reasoning , 2000, CADE.

[9]  Michael Grüninger,et al.  Constructing an Ontology Repository: A Case Study with Theories of Time Intervals , 2011, WoMO.

[10]  Elchanan Mossel,et al.  Sorting and Selection in Posets , 2007, SIAM J. Comput..

[11]  Ali Hashemi,et al.  Using Repositories for Ontology Design and Semantic Mapping , 2009 .

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

[13]  Till Mossakowski,et al.  Conservativity in Structured Ontologies , 2008, ECAI.

[14]  Herbert B. Enderton,et al.  A mathematical introduction to logic , 1972 .

[15]  Joseph A. Goguen,et al.  Putting Theories Together to Make Specifications , 1977, IJCAI.

[16]  Lluís Vila Formal Theories of Time and Temporal Incidence , 2005, Handbook of Temporal Reasoning in Artificial Intelligence.

[17]  Bijan Parsia,et al.  Ontology Integration Using epsilon-Connections , 2009, Modular Ontologies.

[18]  Stefano Spaccapietra,et al.  Modular Ontologies: Concepts, Theories and Techniques for Knowledge Modularization , 2009, Modular Ontologies.

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

[20]  William M. Farmer,et al.  Little Theories , 1992, CADE.

[21]  Giorgie Dzhaparidze,et al.  A Generalized Notion of Weak Interpretability and the Corresponding Modal Logic , 1993, Ann. Pure Appl. Log..

[22]  Michael Gruninger Definability and Process Ontologies , 2009 .

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

[24]  Bijan Parsia,et al.  The modular structure of an ontology: an empirical study , 2010, Description Logics.

[25]  Yannis Kalfoglou,et al.  Institutionalising ontology-based semantic integration , 2008, Appl. Ontology.

[26]  Torsten Hahmann,et al.  Ontology Verification with Repositories , 2010, FOIS.