Soft Computing

, Volume 23, Issue 14, pp 5411–5429 | Cite as

A formal model of semantic computing

  • Yuncheng JiangEmail author


In the existing works of semantic computing (SC), the word “computing” in the phrase “semantic computing” means computational implementations of semantics reasoning (e.g., ontology reasoning, rule reasoning, semantic query, and semantic search) but is irrelevant to the formal theory of computation (e.g., computational models such as finite automaton, pushdown automaton, and Turing machine). In this paper, we propose a different understanding of “semantic computing” from a computation theory perspective. Concretely, we present a formal model of SC in terms of automata and discuss SC for the two most important and simplest types of automata, namely finite automata and pushdown automata. For each automaton, we first consider a simple case (equivalent concepts) and then we further investigate a general situation (semantically related concepts). That is, some new automata for SC are provided: finite (or pushdown) automaton for SC under equivalent concepts, finite (or pushdown) automaton for SC w.r.t. external words, nondeterministic finite automaton for SC under equivalent concepts (or w.r.t. external words), fuzzy finite (or pushdown) automaton for SC under semantically related concepts, and fuzzy finite (or pushdown) automaton for SC w.r.t. external words. Furthermore, we give some properties of these new automata for SC and prove that these new automata are extensions (or enlargements) of traditional (fuzzy) automata.


Semantic computing Finite automata Pushdown automata Fuzzy finite automata Fuzzy pushdown automata 



This study was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant Nos. 61772210 and 61272066; Guangdong Province Universities and Colleges Pearl River Scholar Funded Scheme (2018); the Project of Science and Technology in Guangzhou in China under Grant No. 201807010043; the key project in universities in Guangdong Province of China under Grant No. 2016KZDXM024; and the Innovation Project of Postgraduate Education in Guangdong Province of China under Grant No. 2016SFKC_13.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Author Yuncheng Jiang declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.


  1. Abello A, Romero O, Pedersen TB, Berlanga R, Nebot V, Aramburu MJ, Simitsis A (2015) Using semantic Web technologies for exploratory OLAP: a survey. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 2(2015):571–588Google Scholar
  2. Ait-Ameur Y, Baron M, Bellatreche L, Jean S, Sardet E (2017) Ontologies in engineering: the OntoDB/OntoQL platform. Soft Comput 21(2):369–389Google Scholar
  3. Antoniou G, D’Aquin M, Pan JZ (2011) Semantic Web dynamics. J Web Semant 9(3):245–246Google Scholar
  4. Baader F, Calvanese D, McGuinness DL, Nardi D, Patel-Schneider PF (2007) The description logic handbook: theory, implementation and applications, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Ben Aouicha M, Hadj Taieb MA, Ben Hamadou A (2018) SISR: system for integrating semantic relatedness and similarity measures. Soft Comput Mar 22(6):1855–1879Google Scholar
  6. Berardi D, Rosa FD, Santis LD, Mecella M (2004) Finite state automata as conceptual model for e-Services. J Integr Des Process Sci 8(2):105–121Google Scholar
  7. Berners-Lee T, Hendler J, Lassila O (2001) The semantic web. Sci Am 284(5):34–43Google Scholar
  8. Bizer C, Lehmann J, Kobilarov G, Auer S, Becker C, Cyganiak R, Hellmann S (2009) DBpedia—a crystallization point for the web of data. J Web Semant 7(3):154–165Google Scholar
  9. Blanco R, Halpin H, Herzig DM, Mika P, Pound J, Thompson HS, Tran T (2013) Repeatable and reliable semantic search evaluation. J Web Semant 21:14–29Google Scholar
  10. Breslin JG, O’Sullivan D, Passant A, Vasiliu L (2010) Semantic Web computing in industry. Comput Ind 61(8):729–741Google Scholar
  11. Cao Y, Chen G (2010) A fuzzy petri-nets model for computing with words. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 18(3):486–499Google Scholar
  12. Cao Y, Xia L, Ying M (2013) Probabilistic automata for computing with words. J Comput Syst Sci 79(1):152–172MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Chang YC, Hsieh YL, Chen CC, Hsu WL (2017) A semantic frame-based intelligent agent for topic detection. Soft Comput 21(2):391–401Google Scholar
  14. Chiang I, Liu CC, Tsai Y, Kumar A (2015) A discovering latent semantics in web documents using fuzzy clustering. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 23(6):2122–2134Google Scholar
  15. Couto FM, Silva MJ, Coutinho PM (2007) Measuring semantic similarity between Gene Ontology terms. Data Knowl Eng 61(1):137–152Google Scholar
  16. Dang Z, Ibarra OH, Su J (2005) On composition and lookahead delegation of e-services modeled by automata. Theoret Comput Sci 341(1–3):344–363MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. Dubois D, Prade H (2001) Possibility theory, probability theory and multiple-valued logics: a clarification. Ann Math Artif Intell 32(1):35–66MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. Eiter T, Ianni G, Lukasiewicz T, Schindlauer R, Tompits H (2008) Combining answer set programming with description logics for the semantic web. Artif Intell 172(12–13):1495–1539MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. El-Qurna J, Yahyaoui H, Almulla M (2017) A new framework for the verification of service trust behaviors. Knowl Based Syst 121:7–22Google Scholar
  20. Glimm B, Horrocks I, Motik B, Stoilos G, Wang Z (2014) HermiT: an OWL 2 reasoner. J Autom Reason 53(3):245–269zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. Grau BC, Horrocks I, Motik B, Parsia B, Patel-Schneider P, Sattler U (2008) OWL 2: the next step for OWL. J Web Semant 6(4):309–322Google Scholar
  22. Gutierrez C, Hurtado CA, Mendelzon AO, Perez J (2011) Foundations of semantic web databases. J Comput Syst Sci 77(3):520–541MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. Haarslev V, Hidde K, Moller R, Wessel M (2012) The RacerPro knowledge representation and reasoning system. Semant Web 3(3):267–277Google Scholar
  24. Hao K, Gong Z, Huo C, Sheu PCY (2011) Semantic computing and computer science. Int J Semant Comput 5(1):95–120Google Scholar
  25. Hasanzadeh-Mofrad M, Rezvanian A (2018) Learning automata clustering. J Comput Sci 24:379–388MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  26. Heymans S, Nieuwenborgh DV, Vermeir D (2007) Open answer set programming for the semantic web. J Appl Logic 5(1):144–169MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. Horrocks I, Patel-Schneider PF, Bechhofer S, Tsarkov D (2005) OWL rules: a proposal and prototype implementation. J Web Semant 3(1):23–40Google Scholar
  28. Hossein Zadeh PD, Hossein Zadeh MD, Reformat MZ (2017) Feature-driven linguistic-based entity matching in linked data with application in pharmacy. Soft Comput 21(2):353–368Google Scholar
  29. Jiang Y (2018) A general type-2 fuzzy model for computing with words. Int J Intell Syst 33(4):713–758Google Scholar
  30. Jiang Y, Tang Y (2014) An interval type-2 fuzzy model of computing with words. Inf Sci 281:418–442MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. Jiang Y, Tang Y, Deng P (2006) A service composition model based on finite state automata. CAAI Trans Intell Syst 1(2):48–57Google Scholar
  32. Jiang Y, Zhang X, Tang Y, Nie R (2015) Feature-based approaches to semantic similarity assessment of concepts using Wikipedia. Inf Process Manag 51(3):215–234Google Scholar
  33. Jiang Y, Bai W, Zhang X, Hu J (2017) Wikipedia-based information content and semantic similarity computation. Inf Process Manag 53(1):248–265Google Scholar
  34. Jin J, Kim M, Rivett P (2015) Semantic computing for education. Int J Semant Comput 9(3):395–413Google Scholar
  35. Kim J, Ostrowski DA, Yamaguch H, Sheu PCY (2013) Semantic computing and business intelligence. Int J Semant Comput 7(1):87–117Google Scholar
  36. Kim J, Wang G, Bae ST (2014) A survey of big data technologies and how semantic computing can help. Int J Semant Comput 8(1):99–117Google Scholar
  37. Laura L, Me G (2017) Searching the Web for illegal content: the anatomy of a semantic search engine. Soft Comput 21(5):1245–1252Google Scholar
  38. Letelier A, Perez J, Pichler R, Skritek S (2013) Static analysis and optimization of semantic web queries. ACM Trans Database Syst 38(4):Article 25MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. Li Y, Bandar ZA, McLean D (2003) An approach for measuring semantic similarity between words using multiple information sources. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 15(4):871–882Google Scholar
  40. Liu H, Bao H, Xu D (2012) Concept vector for semantic similarity and relatedness based on WordNet structure. J Syst Softw 85(2):370–381Google Scholar
  41. Medelyan O, Milne D, Legg C, Witten IH (2009) Mining meaning from Wikipedia. Int J Hum Comput Stud 67(9):716–754Google Scholar
  42. Moradabadi B, Meybodi MR (2018) Link prediction in weighted social networks using learning automata. Eng Appl Artif Intell 70:16–24zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  43. Pirro G (2009) A semantic similarity metric combining features and intrinsic information content. Data Knowl Eng 68(11):1289–1308Google Scholar
  44. Ponzetto SP, Strube M (2007) Knowledge derived from Wikipedia for computing semantic relatedness. J Artif Intell Res 30:181–212zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  45. Pulido JRG, Ruiz MAG, Herrera R, Cabello E, Legrand S, Elliman D (2006) Ontology languages for the semantic web: a never completely updated review. Knowl Based Syst 19(7):489–497Google Scholar
  46. Punnoose R, Crainiceanu A, Rapp D (2015) SPARQL in the cloud using Rya. Inf Syst 48:181–195Google Scholar
  47. Puttonen J, Lobov A, Soto MAC, Lastra JLM (2015) Planning-based semantic web service composition in factory automation. Adv Eng Inform 29(4):1041–1054Google Scholar
  48. Qiu D, Wang H (2005) A probabilistic model of computing with words. J Comput Syst Sci 70(2):176–200MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  49. Ramos L (2015) Semantic Web for manufacturing, trends and open issues: toward a state of the art. Comput Ind Eng 90:444–460Google Scholar
  50. Ross S (2012) A first course in probability, 9th edn. Pearson, LondonGoogle Scholar
  51. Shamsizadeh M, Zahedi MM (2016) Intuitionistic general fuzzy automata. Soft Comput 20(9):3505–3519zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  52. Sheu PCY, Yu H, Ramamoorthy CV, Joshi AK, Zadeh LA (2010) Semantic computing. IEEE Press, Wiley, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  53. Sipser M (2013) Introduction of the theory of computation, 3rd edn. Cengage Learning, BostonzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  54. Sirin E, Parsia B, Grau BC, Kalyanpur A, Katz Y (2007) Pellet: a practical OWL-DL reasoner. J Web Semant 5(2):51–53Google Scholar
  55. Sohn M, Jeong S, Kim J, Lee HJ (2017) Crowdsourced healthcare knowledge creation using patients’ health experience-ontologies. Soft Comput 21(18):5207–5221Google Scholar
  56. Staab S, Studer R (2009) Handbook on ontologies, international handbooks on information systems, 2nd edn. Springer, BerlinzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  57. Storey VC, Burton-Jones A, Sugumaran V, Purao S (2008) CONQUER: a methodology for context-aware query processing on the World Wide Web. Inf Syst Res 19(1):3–25Google Scholar
  58. Tappolet J, Kiefer C, Bernstein A (2010) Semantic web enabled software analysis. J Web Semant 8(2–3):225–240Google Scholar
  59. Wang H, Qiu D (2003) Computing with words via turing machines: a formal approach. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 11(6):742–753Google Scholar
  60. Wang HH, Gibbins N, Payne TR, Redavid D (2012) A formal model of the Semantic Web Service Ontology (WSMO). Inf Syst 37(1):33–60Google Scholar
  61. Wang F, Hu L, Zhou J, Hu J, Zhao K (2017) A semantics-based approach to multi-source heterogeneous information fusion in the internet of things. Soft Comput 21(8):2005–2013Google Scholar
  62. Ying M (2002) A formal model of computing with words. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 10(5):640–652Google Scholar
  63. Zadeh L (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8(3):338–353zbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Computer ScienceSouth China Normal UniversityGuangzhouChina

Personalised recommendations