LATPub105: Unterschied zwischen den Versionen
Aus International Center for Computational Logic
Marcel Lippmann (Diskussion | Beiträge) KKeine Bearbeitungszusammenfassung |
Marcel Lippmann (Diskussion | Beiträge) KKeine Bearbeitungszusammenfassung |
||
| (2 dazwischenliegende Versionen desselben Benutzers werden nicht angezeigt) | |||
| Zeile 1: | Zeile 1: | ||
{{Publikation Erster Autor | {{Publikation Erster Autor | ||
|ErsterAutorVorname= | |ErsterAutorVorname=Franz | ||
|ErsterAutorNachname=Baader | |ErsterAutorNachname=Baader | ||
|FurtherAuthors= | |FurtherAuthors= | ||
| Zeile 12: | Zeile 12: | ||
|Note= | |Note= | ||
|Number=2--4 | |Number=2--4 | ||
|Pages=175 | |Pages=175-219 | ||
|Publisher= | |Publisher= | ||
|Volume=18 | |Volume=18 | ||
| Zeile 18: | Zeile 18: | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{Publikation Details | {{Publikation Details | ||
|Abstract=In most of the implemented terminological knowledge representation systems it is | |Abstract=In most of the implemented terminological knowledge representation systems it is not possible to state recursive concept definitions, so-called terminological cycles. One reason is that it is not clear what kind of semantics to use for such cyles. In addition, the inference algorithms used in such systems may go astray in the presence of terminological cycles. In this paper we consider terminological cycles in a very small terminological representation language. For this language, the effect of the three types of semantics introduced by B. Nebel can completely be described with the help of finite automata. These descriptions provide for a rather intuitive understanding of terminologies with recursive definitions, and they give an insight into the essential features of the respective semantics. In addition, one obtains algorithms and complexity results for the subsumption problem and for related inference tasks. The results of this paper may help to decide what kind of semantics is most appropriate for cyclic definitions, depending on the representation task. | ||
not possible to state recursive concept definitions, so-called terminological | |||
cycles. One reason is that it is not clear what kind of semantics to use for | |||
such cyles. In addition, the inference algorithms used in such systems may go | |||
astray in the presence of terminological cycles. In this paper we consider | |||
terminological cycles in a very small terminological representation language. | |||
For this language, the effect of the three types of semantics introduced by B. | |||
Nebel can completely be described with the help of finite automata. These | |||
descriptions provide for a rather intuitive understanding of terminologies with | |||
recursive definitions, and they give an insight into the essential features of | |||
the respective semantics. In addition, one obtains algorithms and complexity | |||
results for the subsumption problem and for related inference tasks. The results | |||
of this paper may help to decide what kind of semantics is most appropriate for | |||
cyclic definitions, depending on the representation task. | |||
|ISBN= | |ISBN= | ||
|ISSN= | |ISSN= | ||
| Zeile 51: | Zeile 36: | ||
year = {1996}, | year = {1996}, | ||
} | } | ||
}} | }} | ||
Aktuelle Version vom 25. März 2015, 16:34 Uhr
Using Automata Theory for Characterizing the Semantics of Terminological Cycles
Franz BaaderFranz Baader
Franz Baader
Using Automata Theory for Characterizing the Semantics of Terminological Cycles
Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 18(2--4):175-219, 1996
Using Automata Theory for Characterizing the Semantics of Terminological Cycles
Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 18(2--4):175-219, 1996
- KurzfassungAbstract
In most of the implemented terminological knowledge representation systems it is not possible to state recursive concept definitions, so-called terminological cycles. One reason is that it is not clear what kind of semantics to use for such cyles. In addition, the inference algorithms used in such systems may go astray in the presence of terminological cycles. In this paper we consider terminological cycles in a very small terminological representation language. For this language, the effect of the three types of semantics introduced by B. Nebel can completely be described with the help of finite automata. These descriptions provide for a rather intuitive understanding of terminologies with recursive definitions, and they give an insight into the essential features of the respective semantics. In addition, one obtains algorithms and complexity results for the subsumption problem and for related inference tasks. The results of this paper may help to decide what kind of semantics is most appropriate for cyclic definitions, depending on the representation task. - Forschungsgruppe:Research Group: AutomatentheorieAutomata Theory
@article{ Baader-AMAI-96,
author = {F. {Baader}},
journal = {Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence},
number = {2--4},
pages = {175--219},
title = {Using Automata Theory for Characterizing the Semantics of Terminological Cycles},
volume = {18},
year = {1996},
}
