Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Agreement Technologies pp 69–82Cite as

Logical Formalisms for Agreement Technologies

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Law, Governance and Technology Series ((LGTS,volume 8))

Abstract

This chapter provides an overview of the logical formalisms that have been proposed to define the formal semantics of knowledge systems that are distributed, heterogeneous and multi contextual. It starts with the abstract notions that are common to many of these logics, and then focuses on individual formalisms.

This is a preview of subscription content, 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   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover 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

Notes

  1. 1.

    We use the term “agent” to denote any entity which can act towards a goal, such as a service, an application, a device, or even a person or organisation.

  2. 2.

    This is the subject of Chap. 6 .

  3. 3.

    Nonetheless, \(\mathcal{E}\)-connection is a formalism where non-binary alignments can be expressed, as explained in Sect. 5.6.

  4. 4.

    Chapter 6 gives a more detailed account on how to discover implicit binary correspondences between two ontologies.

  5. 5.

    For a set S, \({r}_{ij}(S) =\{ x \in{\Delta }^{{\mathcal{I}}_{j}}\mid \exists y \in S,\langle x,y\rangle \in{r}_{ij}\}\).

  6. 6.

    http://clarkparsia.com/pellet/

References

  • Analyti, A., G. Antoniou, and C. V. Damásio. 2011. MWeb: A principled framework for modular web rule bases and its semantics. ACM Transaction on Computational Logics 17(2): 46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Analyti, A., G. Antoniou, C. V. Damásio, and G. Wagner. 2008. Extended rdf as a semantic foundation of rule markup languages. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 32: 37–94.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Bao, J., D. Caragea, and V. G. Honavar. 2006. On the semantics of linking and importing in modular ontologies. In Proceedings of the 5th international semantic web conference on the semantic web – ISWC 2006, Athens, GA, USA, November 5–9, 2006. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, ed. I. F. Cruz, et al., vol. 4273, 72–86. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bao, J., G. Voutsadakis, G. Slutzki, and V. G. Honavar. 2009. Package-based description logics. In Modular ontologies: Concepts, theories and techniques for knowledge modularization. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, ed. H. Stuckenschmidt, C. Parent, and S. Spaccapietra, vol. 5445, 349–371. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Béziau, J. Y., W. Carnielli, and D. M. Gabbay. 2007. Handbook of paraconsistency. London: College Publications.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Borgida, A., and L. Serafini. 2003. Distributed description logics: Assimilating information from peer sources. Journal on Data Semantics 1: 153–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calvanese, D., E. Franconi, V. Haarslev, D. Lembo, B. Motik, S. Tessaris, and A. Y. Turhan (eds.). 2007.Proceedings of the 20th international workshop on description logics DL’07, June 8–10, 2007, Brixen/Bressanone, Italy. Bolzano University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, J. J., C. Bizer, P. Hayes, and P. Stickler. 2007. Named graphs, provenance and trust. In Proceedings of the 14th international conference on world wide web, WWW 2005, Chiba, Japan, May 10–14, 2005, ed. A. Ellis and T. Hagino, 613–622. ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesñevar, C. I., A. G. Maguitman, and R. P. Loui. 2000. Logical models of argument. ACM Computing Survey 32(4): 337–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cruz, I. F., S. Decker, D. Allemang, C. Preist, D. Schwabe, P. Mika, M. Uschold, and L. Aroyo (eds.). 2006. Proceedings of the 5th international semantic web conference on the semantic web – ISWC 2006, Athens, GA, USA, November 5–9, 2006. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4273. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuenca-Grau, B., and O. Kutz. 2007. Modular ontology languages revisisted. In SWeCKa 2007: Proceedings of the IJCAI-2007 workshop on semantic web for collaborative knowledge acquisition, Hyderabad, India, January 7, 2007, ed. V. G. Honavar, T. Finin, D. Caragea, D. Mladenic, and Y. Sure.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuenca-Grau, B., B. Parsia, and E. Sirin. 2006. Combining OWL ontologies using \(\mathcal{E}\)-connections. Journal of Web Semantics 4(1): 40–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • García, A. J., and G. R. Simari. 2004. Defeasible logic programming: An argumentative approach. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 4(1–2): 95–138.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Ghidini, C., and L. Serafini. 2000. Distributed first order logics. In: Frontiers of combining systems 2. Studies in Logic and Computation, ed. D. M. Gabbay and M. de Rijke, vol. 7, 121–139. Baldock/Philadelphia: Research Studies Press. citeseer.ist.psu.edu/ghidini98distributed.html.

  • Guha, R. V., R. McCool, and R. Fikes. 2004. Contexts for the semantic web. In Proceedings of the third international semantic web conference on the Semantic Web – ISWC 2004, Hiroshima, Japan, November 7–11, 2004. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, ed. F. van Harmelen, S. McIlraith, and D. Plexousakis, vol. 3298, 32–46. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, S., and A. Seaborne. SPARQL 1.1 query language – W3C working draft 5 January 2012. W3C Working Draft, World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) (2012). http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/WD-sparql11-query-20120105/.

  • Hitzler, P., and F. van Harmelen. 2010. A reasonable semantic web. Semantic Web Journal 1(1). Available from http://www.semantic-web-journal.net/.

  • Hogan, A., A. Harth, and A. Polleres. 2008. Saor: Authoritative reasoning for the web. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Asian semantic web conference on the semantic web, ASWC 2008, Bangkok, Thailand, December 8–11, 2008. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, ed. J. Domingue and C. Anutariya, vol. 5367, 76–90. Berlin/New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homola, M. 2007. Distributed description logics revisited. In Proceedings of the 20th international workshop on description logics DL’07, June 8–10, 2007, Brixen/Bressanone, Italy, ed. D. Calvanese, E. Franconi, V. Haarslev, D. Lembo, B. Motik, S. Tessaris, and A. Y. Turhan. Bolzano University Press. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-250/paper_51.pdf.

  • Homola, M., and L. Serafini. 2012. Contextualized knowledge repositories for the semantic web. Journal of Web Semantics 12: 64–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, Z., F. van Harmelen, and A. ten Teije. 2005. Reasoning with inconsistent ontologies. In IJCAI-05, Proceedings of the nineteenth international joint conference on artificial intelligence, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, July 30-August 5, 2005, ed. L. P. Kaelbling and A. Saffiotti, 454–459. Professional Book Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kutz, O., C. Lutz, F. Wolter, and M. Zakharyaschev. 2004. \(\mathcal{E}\)-connections of abstract description systems. Artificial Intelligence 156(1): 1–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lenat, D. B. 1995. CYC: a large-scale investment in knowledge infrastructure. Communications of the ACM 38(11): 33–38. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/219717.219745.

  • McCarthy, J. L. 1987. Generality in artificial intelligence. Communications of the ACM 30(12): 1029–1035.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meilicke, C., H. Stuckenschmidt, and A. Tamilin. 2008. Supporting manual mapping revision using logical reasoning. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Third AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI 2008, Chicago, Illinois, USA, July 13–17, 2008, ed. D. Fox and C. P. Gomes, 1213–1218. AAAI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Serafini, L., and A. Tamilin. 2005. DRAGO: Distributed reasoning architecture for the semantic web. In Proceedings of the Second European Semantic Web Conference on the semantic web: Research and applications, ESWC 2005, Heraklion, Crete, Greece, May 29–June 1, 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, ed. A. Gomez-Perez and J. Euzenat, vol. 3532, 361–376. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmermann, A. 2007. Integrated distributed description logics. In Proceedings of the 20th international workshop on description logics DL’07, Brixen/Bressanone, Italy, June 8–10, 2007, ed. D. Calvanese, E. Franconi, V. Haarslev, D. Lembo, B. Motik, S. Tessaris, and A. Y. Turhan, 507–514. Bolzano University Press. http://ftp.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/Publications/CEUR-WS/Vol-250/paper_37.pdf.

  • Zimmermann, A., and C. L. Duc. 2008. Reasoning on a network of aligned ontologies. In Proceedings of the second international conference on web reasoning and rule systems, RR 2008, Karlsruhe, Germany, October/November 2008, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, ed. D. Calvanese and H. Lausen, vol. 5341, 43–57. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmermann, A., and J. Euzenat. 2006. Three semantics for distributed systems and their relations with alignment composition. In Proceedings of the 5th international semantic web conference on the semantic web – ISWC 2006, Athens, GA, USA, November 5–9, 2006. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, I. F. Cruz, S. Decker, D. Allemang, C. Preist, D. Schwabe, P. Mika, M. Uschold, and L. Aroyo, vol. 4273, 16–29. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer. http://iswc2006.semanticweb.org/items/Zimmermann2006jw.pdf.

  • Zimmermann, A., R. Sahay, R. Fox, and A. Polleres. 2009. Heterogeneity and context in semantic-web-enabled HCLS systems. In Proceedings of teh confederated international conferences on the move to meaningful internet systems: OTM 2009, CoopIS, DOA, IS, and ODBASE 2009, Vilamoura, Portugal, November 1–6, 2009, Part II. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, ed. D. Calvanese and H. Lausen, vol. 5871, 1165–1182. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. École Nationale Supérieure des Mines, FAYOL-ENSMSE, LSTI, F-42023, Saint-Étienne, France

    Antoine Zimmermann

Authors
  1. Antoine Zimmermann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Antoine Zimmermann .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Room DI-241, University Rey Juan, Calle Tulipan s/n, Madrid/Mostoles, 28933, Spain

    Sascha Ossowski

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Zimmermann, A. (2013). Logical Formalisms for Agreement Technologies. In: Ossowski, S. (eds) Agreement Technologies. Law, Governance and Technology Series, vol 8. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5583-3_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5583-3_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-007-5582-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-007-5583-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation