1 / 22

Jerome.Euzenat@inrialpes.fr

Enabling technologies for semantic interoperability. Jérôme Euzenat. Jerome.Euzenat@inrialpes.fr. 655 avenue de l’Europe, 38330 Montbonnot Saint-Martin, France. The web. semantic. The semantic webs. Escrire (INRIA) (with Orpailleur and Acacia projects). Conceptual graphs.

bryga
Download Presentation

Jerome.Euzenat@inrialpes.fr

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Enabling technologies for semantic interoperability Jérôme Euzenat Jerome.Euzenat@inrialpes.fr 655 avenue de l’Europe, 38330 Montbonnot Saint-Martin, France

  2. The web semantic

  3. The semantic webs

  4. Escrire (INRIA)(with Orpailleur and Acacia projects) Conceptual graphs Object-based KR language Query Description logics

  5. Reasons for heterogeneity • • Language suitability (expressiveness…) • • Preferences • • Legacy knowledge • • Techno-diversity is good! • • Are the languages really mature? • Some reasons are arguable but some are good

  6. Knowledge (ontology) representation language reasonner Ontology Language semantics Description

  7. Meaning preservation T W KRL1 T(W) KRL "d, W |=KRL1 dÞT(W) |=KRL T(d) "d, T(W)|=KRL T(d) ÞW |=KRL1 d

  8. Solutions • • Pivot languages • • Modular family of languages • • Transformation and properties • • Pattern-based language construction

  9. Pivot language • • In the line of the Web: the HTML of knowledge • • Which one? • • Not problem free: loss of knowledge, confusion… (no round trip).

  10. The modular semantic way Elementary operators r1 L1 s1 r=ƒr(r1,…rn) L=ƒl(L1,…Ln) s =ƒs(s1,…sn) rn Ln sn This have been done in DLML for syntax and semantics and mainly in description logics for reasonners

  11. DLML: features • Modular conception of DL descriptions: • • Description (DTD,DSD) of 40+ constructors • • Automatic generation of 25+ logics by assembling constructors • • Compatible DTD for all logics. • Note: inference rules could be described the same way.

  12. DLML: transformations • From logic specification to DTD and DSD • From logic to LaTeX • From ALC to ALUE • From ALC to AL • From FaCT to ALUNI and back • From Syllogistic to AL and back

  13. The semantic-driven transformation r1 rp L1 Lp s1 sp T1 = ƒt(L1,s1/L,s) Tp= ƒt(Lp,sp/L,s) r L s

  14. The semantic-driven transformation r1 rp L1 ont1 Lp ontp s1 sp T1 = ƒt(L1,s1/L,s) Tp= ƒt(Lp,sp/L,s) r Ont = T1(ont1)+ Tp(ontp) L s This is easily doable when LiÍ L but can become really hard

  15. DSD: principles • Coded by using MathML and Xpath conventions • Require the interpretation of the language.

  16. DSD: example • … • <dsd:interpretation match="CLASS"/> • <subset/> • <apply><intersect/> • <dsd:domain name="D"/> • <dsd:apply-interpretation select="@superclass"/> • <dsd:apply-interpretation select="FIELD"/> • </apply> • </dsd:interpretation> • <dsd:interpretation match="FIELD"> • <equal/> • <apply><intersect/> • <dsd:apply-interpretation select="*"/> • </apply> • </dsd:interpretation> • …

  17. DSD: purpose • • pretty-printing semantics (XSLT); • • documenting a format; • • computing base interpretation (XSLT); • • proof-checking transformations; • • assisted proof (properties of transformations); • • automatic proof (p.o.t.); • • …

  18. The ontology-pattern way(with Heiner Stuckenschmidt, TZI-Bremen) r1 L1 s1 ƒr(.) ƒl(.) ƒs(.) rn Ln sn r =ƒr(r1,…rn) L=ƒl(L1,…Ln) s =ƒs(s1,…sn)

  19. DLML as a pattern? Adding a role constructor ƒl(.)=the entry for roles must accept the constructor with its own syntax ƒs(.)=the interpretation of a term is still the intersection of the interpretation of the constructors This is still part of the easy things to do …because DL have been neatly designed

  20. The pattern-based transformation m’ m m’ o m-1 ont1 ontp ƒ(m’ o m-1 )

  21. Conclusion • The interoperability issue is a serious problem at the web-scale. • There are many useful, doable, reasonable techniques (e.g. DLML); • The general case is difficult

  22. Contact… • http://www.inrialpes.fr/exmo/ • Jerome.Euzenat@inrialpes.fr

More Related