Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Method for Reasoning with Ontologies Represented as Conceptual Graphs

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
AI 2001: Advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI 2001)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 2256))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

This paper discusses automated reasoning over ontologies. represented as Conceptual Graphs. We have designed and implemented reasoning tools using Conceptual Graphs as the underlying knowledge structure. This work demonstrates that the power of logic as implemented in Conceptual Graphs, and the tools available in Conceptual Graph Theory can be used as powerful ontology reasoning tools in a real-world domain. We show that ontologies can be constrained and unified using efficient methods, and that these methods provide the basis for an automated reasoning system. The Conceptual Graph techniques of concept join, partial order and subsumption are all exploited to create these reasoning tools.

We dicuss the implementation of our ideas, and demonstrate the reasoning tool that we created in two domains: building architecture and defence. The significance of our work is that the previously static knowledge representation of ontology is now a dynamic, functional reasoning system.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aït-Kaci, H. and R. Nasr, “LOGIN: A Logic Programming Language with Built-in Inheritance.,” Journal of Logic Programming, 1986. 3.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Aït-Kaci, H., A. Podelski, and G. Smolka, A Feature Constraint System for Logic Programming with Entailment,. 1992, Digital Equipment Corporation: Paris, France.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Burrow, A.L. and R. Woodbury. “p-Resolution in Design Space Exploration,” in Proc. CAAD Futures, August, 1999. Atlanta, Georgia, USA: Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Cao, TH., P.N. Creasy, and V. Wuwongse. “Fuzzy Unification and Resolution Proof Procedure for Fuzzy Conceptual Graph Programs,” in Proc. Fifth International Conference on Conceptual Structures, August, 1997. Seattle, Washington, USA: Springer-Verlag. Published as Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence #1257.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Chang, T.-W. and R.F. Woodbury. “Sufficiency of the SEED Knowledge-Level Representation for Grammatical Design,” in Proc. Australian New Zealand Conference on Intelligent Information Systems, November, 1996. Adelaide, Australia: IEEE Press.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Chein, M. and M.-L. Mugnier, “Conceptual Graphs: Fundamental Notions,” Revue d’Intelligence Artificielle, 1992. 6(4): p. 365–406.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Corbett, D.R. “A Framework for Conceptual Graph Unification,” in Proc. Eighth International Conference on Conceptual Structures, August, 2000. Darmstadt, Germany: Shaker Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Corbett, D.R., “Conceptual Graphs with Constrained Reasoning,” Revue d’Intelligence Artificielle, 2001 (to appear).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Corbett, D.R. and A.L. Burrow. “Knowledge Reuse in SEED Exploiting Conceptual Graphs,” in Proc. Fourth International Conference on Conceptual Structures, August, 1996. Sydney, NSW, Australia: UNSW Press.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Corbett, DR. and R.F. Woodbury. “Unification over Constraints in Conceptual Graphs,” in Proc. Seventh International Conference on Conceptual Structures, July, 1999. Blacksburg, Virginia, USA: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Davey, B.A. and H.A. Priestley, Introduction to Lattices and Order. 1990, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Heisserman, J.A., “Generative Geometric Design,” IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 1995. 14(2): p. 37–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Knight, K., “Unification: A Multidisciplinary Survey,” ACM Computing Surveys, 1989. 21(1): p. 93–124.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Mineau, G.W. and C. Miranda, Computer-Aided Design and Artificial Intelligence: Exploration in Architectural Plan Reuse,. 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Mitchard, H., Cognitive Model of an Operations Officer, 1998, Honours Thesis, Computer and Information Science, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Mitchard, H., J. Winkles, and D.R. Corbett. “Development and Evaluation of a Cognitive Model of an Air Defence Operations Officer,” in Proc. Fifth Biennial Conference of the Australasian Cognitive Science Society, May, 2000. Adelaide, South Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Mugnier, M.-L. and M. Chein, “Représenter des Connaissances et Raisonner avec des Graphes,” Revue d’Intelligence Artificielle, 1996. 10(6): p. 7–56.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Reynolds, J.C., “Transformational Systems and the Algebraic Structure of Atomic Formulas,” Machine Intelligence, 1970. 5.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Sowa, J. “Conceptual Graphs: Draft Proposed American National Standard,” in Proc. Seventh International Conference on Conceptual Structures, July, 1999. Blacksburg, Virginia, USA: Springer-Verlag. Published as volume #1640 of Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Sowa, J.F., Conceptual Structures: Information Processing in Mind and Machine. 1984, Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Sowa, J.F., Conceptual Graphs Summary, in Conceptual Structures: Current Research and Practice. 1992, Ellis Horwood: Chichester, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Van Hentenryck, P., Constraint Satisfaction in Logic Programming. Logic Programming, ed. E. Shapiro. 1989, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Van Hentenryck, P., L. Michel, and Y. Deville, Numerica. 1997, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Willems, M. “Projection and Unification for Conceptual Graphs,” in Proc. Third International Conference on Conceptual Structures, August, 1995. Santa Cruz, California, USA: Springer-Verlag. Published as Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence #954.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Woodbury, R., S. Datta, and A.L. Burrow. “Erasure in Design Space Exploration,” in Proc. Artificial Intelligence in Design, June, 2000. Worcester, Massachusetts, USA.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Advanced Computing Research Centre School of Computer and Information Science, University of South Australia, 5095, Adelaide, South Australia

    Dan Corbett

Authors
  1. Dan Corbett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Computer and Information Science, University of South Australia, Mawson Lakes, 5095, SA, Australia

    Markus Stumptner  & Dan Corbett  & 

  2. Department of Computer Science, University of Adelaide, 5001, Adelaide, SA, Australia

    Mike Brooks

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Corbett, D. (2001). A Method for Reasoning with Ontologies Represented as Conceptual Graphs. In: Stumptner, M., Corbett, D., Brooks, M. (eds) AI 2001: Advances in Artificial Intelligence. AI 2001. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 2256. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45656-2_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45656-2_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-42960-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45656-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation