Ontology of Integration and Integration of Ontologies

One of the basic problems in the development of techniques for the semantic web is the integration of ontologies. In this paper we deal with a situation where we have various local ontologies, developed independently from each other, and we are required to build an integrated, global ontology as a mean for extracting information from the local ones. In this context, the problem of how to specify the mapping between the global ontology and the local ontologies is a fundamental one, and its solution is essential for establishing an ontology of integration. Description Logics (DLs) are an ideal candidate to formalize ontologies, due to their ability to express complex relationships between concepts. We argue, however, that, for capturing the mapping between different ontologies, the direct use of a DL, even a very expressive one, is not sufficient, and it is necessary to resort to more flexible mechanisms based on the notion of query. Also, we elaborate on the observation that, in the semantic web, the case of mutually inconsistent local ontologies will be very common, and we present the basic ideas in order to extend the integration framework with suitable nonmonotonic features for dealing with this case.

[1]  Diego Calvanese,et al.  Dwq : Esprit Long Term Research Project, No 22469 on the Decidability of Query Containment under Constraints on the Decidability of Query Containment under Constraints , 2022 .

[2]  Maurizio Lenzerini,et al.  TBox and ABox Reasoning in Expressive Description Logics , 1996, KR.

[3]  Maurizio Lenzerini,et al.  Boosting the Correspondence between Description Logics and Propositional Dynamic Logics , 1994, AAAI.

[4]  Diego Calvanese,et al.  Description Logic Framework for Information Integration , 1998, KR.

[5]  Diego Calvanese,et al.  Unifying Class-Based Representation Formalisms , 2011, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[6]  Diego Calvanese,et al.  Information integration: conceptual modeling and reasoning support , 1998, Proceedings. 3rd IFCIS International Conference on Cooperative Information Systems (Cat. No.98EX122).

[7]  Richard Hull,et al.  Managing semantic heterogeneity in databases: a theoretical prospective , 1997, PODS.

[8]  Alon Y. Halevy,et al.  Theory of answering queries using views , 2000, SGMD.

[9]  Maurizio Lenzerini,et al.  Representing and Using Interschema Knowledge in Cooperative Information Systems , 1993, Int. J. Cooperative Inf. Syst..

[10]  Ian Horrocks,et al.  Knowledge Representation on the Web , 2000, Description Logics.

[11]  Giuseppe De Giacomo,et al.  Reasoning on UML Class Diagrams in Description Logics , 2001 .

[12]  Diego Calvanese,et al.  Structured Objects: Modeling and Reasoning , 1995, DOOD.

[13]  Giuseppe De Giacomo,et al.  Reasoning in Expressive Description Logics with Fixpoints based on Automata on Infinite Trees , 1999, IJCAI.

[14]  Ian Horrocks,et al.  Adding formal semantics to the Web: building on top of RDF Schema. , 2000 .

[15]  Divesh Srivastava,et al.  The Information Manifold , 1995 .

[16]  Alexander Borgida,et al.  On the Relative Expressiveness of Description Logics and Predicate Logics , 1996, Artif. Intell..

[17]  Jeffrey D. Ullman,et al.  Information integration using logical views , 1997, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[18]  Diego Calvanese,et al.  View-based query processing and constraint satisfaction , 2000, Proceedings Fifteenth Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (Cat. No.99CB36332).

[19]  Alexander Borgida,et al.  Description Logics in Data Management , 1995, IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng..

[20]  Diego Calvanese,et al.  Answering Queries Using Views over Description Logics Knowledge Bases , 2000, AAAI/IAAI.