Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/1942/14450Full metadata record
| DC Field | Value | Language |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.author | ZHANG, Xiaowang | - |
| dc.contributor.author | Lin, Zuoquan | - |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2012-12-12T07:40:25Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2012-12-12T07:40:25Z | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2013 | - |
| dc.identifier.citation | JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS, 40 (3), p. 375-403 | - |
| dc.identifier.issn | 0925-9902 | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/1942/14450 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | This paper presents an argumentation framework for reasoning and management in (inconsistent or incoherent) description logic ontologies which contain conflicts. First, a new argumentation framework obtained by combining Besnard and Hunter’s framework with binary argumentation is introduced to frame the inner relation over axioms in an ontology. A dialogue mechanism, based on this framework, is then presented to derive meaningful consequences from inconsistent ontologies. Three novel operators are developed to repair those axioms or assertions which cause inconsistency or incoherency of ontologies by using this framework. Within this framework, an inconsistency is neither directly assigned a contradictory value nor roughly removed but further analyzed and evaluated. Because of this, reasoning within it satisfies some important logical properties such as consistency-preserving and justifiability. Moreover, it provides an alternative scenario for maintaining consistency and coherency of ontologies with giving consideration to both semantics and syntax. Thus the repaired results by using the proposed framework not only keep the closer semantics but also preserve the syntactic structure of original ontologies. | - |
| dc.description.sponsorship | Research Foundation Flanders - Ph.D. Programs Foundation of Ministry of Education of China | - |
| dc.language.iso | en | - |
| dc.rights | Copyright by Springer. | - |
| dc.subject.other | Ontology; Description logic; Handling inconsistency; Argumentation; Ontology management; Paraconsistent reasoning | - |
| dc.title | An argumentation framework for description logic ontology reasoning and management | - |
| dc.type | Journal Contribution | - |
| dc.identifier.epage | 403 | - |
| dc.identifier.issue | 3 | - |
| dc.identifier.spage | 375 | - |
| dc.identifier.volume | 40 | - |
| local.format.pages | 29 | - |
| local.bibliographicCitation.jcat | A1 | - |
| dc.description.notes | This paper is an extended version of previous proceedings DL 2009 and CAAI 2010. | - |
| dc.relation.references | Arieli, O., Avron, A., Zamansky, A. (2011). What is an ideal logic for reasoning with inconsistency? In Proc. of IJCAI’11, USA (pp. 706–711). Menlo Park: AAAI Press. Baader, F., Calvanese, D., McGuinness, D.L., Nardi, D., Patel-Schneider, P.F. (Eds.) (2003). The description logic handbook: theory, implementation, and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, J., Lassila, O. (2001). The semantic web. New York: Scientific American Magazine. Bertossi, L.E. , Hunter, A., Schaub, T. (Eds.) (2005). Inconsistency tolerance. LNCS 3300. New York: Springer. Besnard, P., & Hunter, A. (2001). A logic-based theory of deductive arguments. Artificial Intelligence, 128(1–2), 203–235. CrossRef Bienvenu, M. (2008). Prime implicate normal form for ALC concepts. In Proc. of AAAI’08, USA (pp. 412–417). Menlo Park: AAAI Press. Black, E., Hunter, A., Pan, J.Z. (2009). An argument-based approach to using multiple ontologies. In Proc. of SUM’09, USA, LNAI 5785 (pp. 68–79). New York: Springer. Calvanese, D. (1996). Finite model reasoning in description logics. In Proc. of KR’96, USA (pp. 292–303). San Mateo: Morgan Kaufmann. Davies, J., Grobelnik, M., Mladenic, D. (Eds.) (2009). Semantic knowledge management. Integrating ontology management, knowledge discovery, and human language technologies. New York: Springer. Du, J., & Shen, Y. (2008). Computing minimum cost diagnoses to repair populated DL-based ontologies. In Proc. of WWW’08, China (pp. 565–574). New York: ACM. Dung, P.M. (1995a). An argumentation-theoretic foundations for logic programming. Journal of Logic Programming, 22(2), 151–171. CrossRef Dung, P.M. (1995b). On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence, 77(2), 321–358. CrossRef Flouris, G., Huang, Z., Pan, J.Z., Plexousakis, D., Wache, H. (2006). Inconsistencies, negations and changes in ontologies. In Proc. of AAAI’06, USA. Menlo Park: AAAI Press. Gómez, S.A. , Chesñevar, C.I. , Simari, G.R. (2008). An argumentative approach to reasoning with inconsistent ontologies. In Proc. of KROW’08, Australia, CRPIT 90 (pp. 11–20). Nottingham: ACS. Gómez, S.A., Chesñevar, C.I., Simari, G.R. (2010). Reasoning with inconsistent ontologies through argumentation. Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 24(1–2), 102–148. CrossRef Grosof, B.N., Horrocks, I., Volz, R., Decker, S. (2003). Description logic programs: combining logic programs with description logic. In Proc. of WWW’03, Hungary (pp. 48–57). New York: ACM. Horrocks, I. (2008). Ontologies and the semantic web. Communications of the ACM, 51(12), 58–67. CrossRef Horrocks, I., & Patel-Schneider, P.F. (2003). Reducing OWL entailment to description logic satisfiability. In Proc. of ISWC’03, USA, LNCS 2870 (pp. 17–29). New York: Springer. Huang, Z., van Harmelen, F., ten Teije, A. (2005). Reasoning with inconsistent ontologies. In Proc. of IJCAI’05, UK (pp. 454–459). Professional Book Center. Ji, Q., Haase, P., Qi, G., Hitzler, P., Stadtmüller, S. (2009). RaDON—repair and diagnosis in ontology networks. In Proc. of ESWC’09, Greece, LNCS 5554 (pp. 863–867). New York: Springer. Kalyanpur, A., Parsia, B., Sirin, E., Grau, C.B. (2006). Debugging unsatisfiable classes in OWL ontologies. Journal of Web Semantics, 3(4), 268–293. CrossRef Kalyanpur, A., Parsia, B., Sirin, E., Grau, C.B. (2006). Repairing unsatisfiable concepts in OWL ontologies. In Proc. of ESWC’06, Montenegro, LNCS 4011 (pp. 170–184). New York: Springer. Konev, B., Walther, D., Wolter, F. (2009). Forgetting and uniform interpolation in large-scale description logic terminologies. In Proc. of IJCAI’09, USA (pp. 830–835). Ma, Y., Hitzler, P., Lin, Z. (2007). Algorithms for paraconsistent reasoning with OWL. In Proc. of ESWC’07, Austria, LNCS 4519 (pp. 399–413). New York: Springer. Meyer, T., Lee, K., Booth, R. (2005). Knowledge integration for description logics. In Proc.of AAAI’05, USA (pp. 645–650). Cambridge: AAAI Press/The MIT Press. Meyer, T., Lee, K., Booth, R., Pan, J. (2006). Finding maximally satisfiable terminologies for the description logic ALC. In Proc. of AAAI’06, USA. Menlo Park: AAAI Press. Odintsov, S.P., & Wansing, H. (2008). Inconsistency-tolerant description logic. part II: a tableau algorithm for CACL c . Journal of Applied Logic, 6(3), 343–360. CrossRef Patel-Schneider, P.F. (1989). A four-valued semantics for terminological logics. Artificial Intelligence, 38(3), 319–351. CrossRef Qi, G., & Du, J. (2009). Model-based revision operators for terminologies in description logics. In Proc. of IJCAI’09, USA (pp. 891–897). Professional Book Center. Schlobach, S. (2005). Diagnosing terminologies. In Proc. of AAAI’05, USA. Cambridge: AAAI Press/The MIT Press. Schlobach, S., & Cornet, R. (2003). Non-standard reasoning services for the debugging of description logic terminologies. In Proc. of IJCAI’03, Mexico (pp. 355–362). San Mateo: Morgan Kaufmann. Sirin, E., Parsia, B., Cuenca Grau, B., Kalyanpur, A., Katz, Y. (2007). Pellet: A practical OWL-DL reasoner. Journal of Web Semantics, 5(2), 51–53. CrossRef Wang, Z., Wang, K., Topor, R.W. (2010). A new approach to knowledge base revision in DL-Lite. In Proc. of AAAI’10, USA. Menlo Park: AAAI Press. Zhang, X., & Lin, Z. (2012). Quasi-classical description logic. Journal of Multiple-Valued Logic and Soft Computing, 18(3–4), 291–327. Zhang, X., Lin, Z., Wang, K. (2010). Towards a paradoxical description logic for the Semantic Web. In Proc. of FoIKS’10, Bulgaria, LNCS 5956 (pp. 306–325). New York: Springer. Zhang, X., Xiao, G., Lin, Z. (2009). A tableau algorithm for handling inconsistency in OWL. In Proc. of ESWC’09, Greece, LNCS 5554 (pp. 399–413). New York: Springer. | - |
| local.type.refereed | Refereed | - |
| local.type.specified | Article | - |
| dc.bibliographicCitation.oldjcat | A1 | - |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.1007/s10844-012-0230-7 | - |
| dc.identifier.isi | 000319070800001 | - |
| item.accessRights | Restricted Access | - |
| item.contributor | ZHANG, Xiaowang | - |
| item.contributor | Lin, Zuoquan | - |
| item.fulltext | With Fulltext | - |
| item.fullcitation | ZHANG, Xiaowang & Lin, Zuoquan (2013) An argumentation framework for description logic ontology reasoning and management. In: JOURNAL OF INTELLIGENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS, 40 (3), p. 375-403. | - |
| item.validation | ecoom 2014 | - |
| crisitem.journal.issn | 0925-9902 | - |
| crisitem.journal.eissn | 1573-7675 | - |
| Appears in Collections: | Research publications | |
Files in This Item:
| File | Description | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| An argumentation framework for description logic ontology reasoning and management.pdf Restricted Access | 538.81 kB | Adobe PDF | View/Open Request a copy |
SCOPUSTM
Citations
13
checked on Sep 2, 2020
WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations
12
checked on Apr 14, 2024
Page view(s)
52
checked on Sep 5, 2022
Download(s)
48
checked on Sep 5, 2022
Google ScholarTM
Check
Altmetric
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.