Weak Contact Structures

  • Ivo Düntsch
  • Michael Winter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3929)


In this paper we investigate weak contact relations C on a lattice L, in particular, the relation between various axioms for contact, and their connection to the algebraic structure of the lattice. Furthermore, we will study a notion of orthogonality which is motivated by a weak contact relation in an inner product space. Although this is clearly a spatial application, we will show that, in case L is distributive and C satisfies the orthogonality condition, the only weak contact relation on L is the overlap relation; in particular no RCC model satisfies this condition.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Cohn, A.G., Varzi, A.: Connection relations in mereotopology. In: Prade, H. (ed.) Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 1998), pp. 150–154. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester (1998)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Düntsch, I., Orłowska, E.: A proof system for contact relation algebras. Journal of Philosophical Logic 29, 241–262 (2000)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Düntsch, I., Orłowska, E., Wang, H.: Algebras of approximating regions. Fundamenta Informaticae 46, 71–82 (2001)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Düntsch, I., Wang, H., McCloskey, S.: Relation algebras in qualitative spatial reasoning. Fundamenta Informaticae, 229–248 (2000)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Düntsch, I., Wang, H., McCloskey, S.: A relation algebraic approach to the Region Connection Calculus. Theoretical Computer Science 255, 63–83 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Düntsch, I., Winter, M.: A representation theorem for Boolean contact algebras. Theoretical Computer Science (B) 347, 498–512 (2005)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Eschenbach, C.: A predication calculus for qualitative spatial representation. In: [8], pp. 157–172Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Freksa, C., Mark, D.M. (eds.): COSIT 1999. LNCS, vol. 1661. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Galton, A.: The mereotopology of discrete space. In: [8], pp. 251–266Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Grätzer, G.: General Lattice Theory. Birkhäuser, Basel (1978)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Leśniewski, S.: O podstawach matematyki, 30–34 (1927–1931)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Randell, D.A., Cohn, A.G., Cui, Z.: Computing transitivity tables: A challenge for automated theorem provers. In: Kapur, D. (ed.) CADE 1992. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 607, pp. 786–790. Springer, Heidelberg (1992)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Vakarelov, D., Dimov, G., Düntsch, I., Bennett, B.: A proximity approach to some region–based theories of space. J. Appl. Non-Classical Logics 12, 527–529 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Whitehead, A.N.: Process and reality. MacMillan, New York (1929)zbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ivo Düntsch
    • 1
  • Michael Winter
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceBrock UniversitySt. CatharinesCanada

Personalised recommendations