Skip to main content

Using a Dependently-Typed Language for Expressing Ontologies

  • Conference paper

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 7091))

Abstract

Since the last decade the wide spread language for expressing ontologies relies on Description Logics (DLs). However, most of the versions syntactically anchor their modeling primitives on classical logic and require additional theories (i.e., first-order logic, ...) for simultaneously supporting (i) the introduction of constant values (e.g., for individuals) (ii) the limitation of expressiveness for decidability and (iii) the introduction of variables for reasoning with rules. In this paper we show that the introduction of a type theoretical formalism that relies both on a constructive logic and on a typed lambda calculus is able to go beyond these aspects in a single theory. In particular we will show that a number of logical choices (constructive logic, predicative universes for data types, impredicative universe for logic, ...) about the theory will lead to an highly expressive theory which allows for the production of conceptually clean and semantically unambiguous ontologies.

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

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Jacobs, B.: Categorical Logic and Type Theory. Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics. Elsevier (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bittner, T., Donnelly, M.: Computational ontologies of parthood, componenthood, and containment. In: Procs. of the Nineteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 382–387 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Burstall, R., Goguen, J.: The Semantics of Clear, a Specification Language. In: Bjorner, D. (ed.) Abstract Software Specifications. LNCS, vol. 86, pp. 292–332. Springer, Heidelberg (1980)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Coquand, T., Huet, G.: The calculus of constructions. Information and Computation 76(2–3), 95–120 (1988)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Dapoigny, R., Barlatier, P.: Towards Ontological Correctness of Part-whole Relations with Dependent Types. In: Procs. of the Sixth International Conference, FOIS 2010, pp. 45–58 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Dapoigny, R., Barlatier, P.: Modeling Contexts with Dependent Types. Fundamenta Informaticae 104(4), 293–327 (2010)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Gangemi, A., Guarino, N., Masolo, C., Oltramari, A., Schneider, L.: Sweetening ontologies with DOLCE. In: Gómez-Pérez, A., Benjamins, V.R. (eds.) EKAW 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2473, pp. 166–181. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Guarino, N.: The Ontological Level. In: Philosophy and the Cognitive Sciences, pp. 443–456. Holder-Pichler-Tempsky (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Guizzardi, G.: The Role of Foundational Ontology for Conceptual Modeling and Domain Ontology Representation. In: 7th International Baltic Conference on Databases and Information Systems, Keynote Paper (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hoekstra, R., Liem, J., Bredeweg, B., Breuker, J.: Requirements for Representing Situations. In: OWLED (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Luo, Z.: Computation and Reasoning, vol. 11. Oxford Science Publications (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Masolo, C., Borgo, S., Gangemi, A., Guarino, N., Oltramari, A.: Ontology Library. WonderWeb Deliverable D18 (ver.1.0, 31-12-2003) (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Masolo, C.: Understanding Ontological Levels. In: Procs. of the Twelfth International Conference on the Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 2010), pp. 258–268. AAAI Press (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Reus, B., Streicher, T.: Verifying Properties of Module Construction in Type Theory. In: Borzyszkowski, A.M., Sokolowski, S. (eds.) MFCS 1993. LNCS, vol. 711, pp. 660–670. Springer, Heidelberg (1993)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Smith, B., Rosse, C.: The Role of Foundational Relations in the Alignment of Biomedical Ontologies. In: Procs. of MEDINFO 2004, pp. 444–449 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Werner, B.: On the strength of proof-irrelevant type theories. Logical Methods in Computer Science 4(3) (2008)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Dapoigny, R., Barlatier, P. (2011). Using a Dependently-Typed Language for Expressing Ontologies. In: Xiong, H., Lee, W.B. (eds) Knowledge Science, Engineering and Management. KSEM 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 7091. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25975-3_23

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25975-3_23

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-25974-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-25975-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics