Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
SLX-Digitalkonferenz: Zukunftswerkstatt 2024

Mehr Umsatz mit Top-Kontakten

Am 7. Mai erfahren Sie, wie Vertriebsteams Leadgenerierung, Leadnurturing und Leadstrategien effizient steuern können.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Erschienen in:
Buchtitelbild

2017 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

Understanding Author Intentions: Test Driven Knowledge Graph Construction

verfasst von : Jeff Z. Pan, Nico Matentzoglu, Caroline Jay, Markel Vigo, Yuting Zhao

Erschienen in: Reasoning Web: Logical Foundation of Knowledge Graph Construction and Query Answering

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

This chapter presents some state of the arts techniques on understanding authors’ intentions during the knowledge graph construction process. In addition, we provide the reader with an overview of the book, as well as a brief introduction of the history and the concept of Knowledge Graph.
We will introduce the notions of explicit author intention and implicit author intention, discuss some approaches for understanding each type of author intentions and show how such understanding can be used in reasoning-based test-driven knowledge graph construction and can help design guidelines for bulk editing, efficient reasoning and increased situational awareness. We will discuss extensively the implications of test driven knowledge graph construction to ontology reasoning.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Nächstes Kapitel Inseparability and Conservative Extensions of Description Logic Ontologies: A Survey
Fußnoten
6
Although there are extensions of OWL for representing default knowledge, which is not included in the current version of OWL.
 
7
cf. Chap. 2 for an introduction of the DL syntax.
 
8
In fact, knowledge graphs can be written in some proprietary syntax, as long as such syntax can be mapped to RDF and OWL.
 
13
Full negation is beyond EL.
 
Literatur
1.
Pan, J.Z., Vetere, G., Gomez-Perez, J.M., Wu, H.: Exploiting Linked Data and Knowledge Graphs for Large Organisations. Springer, Heidelberg (2016)
2.
Baader, F., Calvanese, D., McGuinness, D.L., Nardi, D., Patel-Schneider, P.F.: The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003). ISBN: 0-521-78176-0MATH
3.
Stearns, M.Q., Price, C., Spackman, K.A., Wang, A.Y.: SNOMED clinical terms: overview of the development process and project status. In: Proceedings of the AMIA Symposium, p. 662. American Medical Informatics Association (2001)
4.
Rector, A., Drummond, N., Horridge, M., Rogers, J., Knublauch, H., Stevens, R., Wang, H., Wroe, C.: OWL pizzas: practical experience of teaching OWL-DL: common errors & common patterns. In: Motta, E., Shadbolt, N.R., Stutt, A., Gibbins, N. (eds.) EKAW 2004. LNCS, vol. 3257, pp. 63–81. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRef
5.
Dzbor, M., Motta, E., Gomez, J.M., Buil, C., Dellschaft, K., Görlitz, O., Lewen, H.: D4.1.1 analysis of user needs, behaviours & requirements wrt user interfaces for ontology engineering. Technical report, August 2006
6.
Brachman, R.J., Levesque, H.J. (eds.): Readings in Knowledge Representation. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco (1985). ISBN: 093461301XMATH
7.
Sowa, J.F.: Semantic networks. In: Encyclopedia of Artificial Intelligence. Wiley, New York (1987)
8.
Russell, S.J., Norvig, P.: Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach, 3rd edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (2010). ISBN: 978-0-13-604259-4MATH
9.
Quillian, M.R.: Word concepts: a theory and simulation of some basic semantic capabilities. Behav. Sci. 12(5), 410–430 (1967)CrossRef
10.
Minsky, M.: A framework for representing knowledge. In: MIT-AI Laboratory Memo 306 (1974). Reprinted in the Winston, P. (ed.) Psychology of Computer Vision. McGraw-Hill (1975)
11.
Hayes, P.J.: The logic of frames. In: Metzing, D. (ed.) Frame Conceptions and Text Understanding, pp. 46–61. Walter de Gruyter and Co. (1979)
12.
Brachman, R.J., Schmolze, J.G.: An overview of the KL-ONE knowledge representation system. Cogn. Sci. 9(2), 171 (1985)CrossRef
13.
Hayes, P.J., Patel-Schneider, P.F.: RDF 1.1 semantics. W3C Recommendation, February 2014
14.
Pan, J., Horrocks, I.: OWL-Eu: adding customised datatypes into OWL. J. Web Semant. 4(1), 29–39 (2006)CrossRef
15.
Suchanek, F., Kasneci, G., Weikum, G.: Yago: a core of semantic knowledge. In: Proceedings of the WWW (2007)
16.
Bizer, C., Lehmann, J., Kobilarov, G., Auer, S., Becker, C., Cyganiak, R., Hellmann, S.: Dbpedia-a crystallization point for the web of data. J. Web Semant. 7(3), 154–165 (2009)CrossRef
17.
Carlson, A., Betteridge, J., Kisiel, B., Settles, B., Hruschka Jr., E., Mitchell, T.: Toward an architecture for never-ending language learning. In: Proceedings of the AAAI (2010)
18.
Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lembo, D., Lenzerini, M., Rosati, R.: Tractable reasoning and efficient query answering in description logics: the DL-Lite family. J. Autom. Reason. 39(3), 385–429 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefMATH
19.
Baader, F., Brandt, S., Lutz, C.: Pushing the EL envelope further. In: Clark, K., Patel-Schneider, P.F. (eds.) Proceedings of the OWLED 2008 DC Workshop on OWL: Experiences and Directions (2008)
20.
Pan, J.Z., Horrocks, I.: RDFS(FA) and RDF MT: two semantics for RDFS. In: Fensel, D., Sycara, K., Mylopoulos, J. (eds.) ISWC 2003. LNCS, vol. 2870, pp. 30–46. Springer, Heidelberg (2003). doi:10.​1007/​978-3-540-39718-2_​3 CrossRef
21.
Pan, J.Z., Thomas, E.: Approximating OWL-DL ontologies. In: The Proceedings of the 22nd National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2007), pp. 1434–1439 (2007)
22.
Pan, J.Z., Thomas, E., Zhao, Y.: Completeness guaranteed approximation for OWL DL query answering. In: Proceedings of the DL (2009)
23.
Ren, Y., Pan, J.Z., Zhao, Y.: Towards scalable reasoning on ontology streams via syntactic approximation. In: The Proceedings of IWOD2010 (2010)
24.
Console, M., Mora, J., Rosati, R., Santarelli, V., Savo, D.F.: Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of description logic ontologies. In: Mika, P., et al. (eds.) ISWC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8797, pp. 164–179. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). doi:10.​1007/​978-3-319-11915-1_​11
25.
Zhou, Y., Nenov, Y., Grau, B., Horrocks, I.: Pay-as-you-go OWL query answering using a triple store. In: Proceedings of the AAAI (2014)
26.
Pan, J.Z., Ren, Y., Zhao, Y.: Tractable approximate deduction for OWL. Artif. Intell. 235, 95–155
27.
Hogan, A., Pan, J.Z., Polleres, A., Decker, S.: SAOR: template rule optimisations for distributed reasoning over 1 billion linked data triples. In: Patel-Schneider, P.F., Pan, Y., Hitzler, P., Mika, P., Zhang, L., Pan, J.Z., Horrocks, I., Glimm, B. (eds.) ISWC 2010. LNCS, vol. 6496, pp. 337–353. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). doi:10.​1007/​978-3-642-17746-0_​22 CrossRef
28.
Urbani, J., Kotoulas, S., Maassen, J., Harmelen, F., Bal, H.: OWL reasoning with WebPIE: calculating the closure of 100 billion triples. In: Aroyo, L., Antoniou, G., Hyvönen, E., Teije, A., Stuckenschmidt, H., Cabral, L., Tudorache, T. (eds.) ESWC 2010. LNCS, vol. 6088, pp. 213–227. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). doi:10.​1007/​978-3-642-13486-9_​15 CrossRef
29.
Ren, Y., Pan, J.Z., Lee, K.: Parallel ABox reasoning of EL ontologies. In: Proceedings of the First Joint International Conference of Semantic Technology (JIST 2011) (2011)
30.
Du, J., Guilin Qi, Y.-D.S., Pan, J.Z.: A decomposition-based approach to OWL DL ontology diagnosis. In: Proceedings of the 23rd IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI 2011) (2011)
31.
Urbani, J., Harmelen, F., Schlobach, S., Bal, H.: QueryPIE: backward reasoning for OWL horst over very large knowledge bases. In: Aroyo, L., Welty, C., Alani, H., Taylor, J., Bernstein, A., Kagal, L., Noy, N., Blomqvist, E. (eds.) ISWC 2011. LNCS, vol. 7031, pp. 730–745. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). doi:10.​1007/​978-3-642-25073-6_​46 CrossRef
32.
Ren, Y., Pan, J.Z., Lee, K.: Optimising parallel ABox reasoning of EL ontologies. In: Proceedings of the DL (2012)
33.
34.
Fokoue, A., Meneguzzi, F., Sensoy, M., Pan, J.Z.: Querying linked ontological data through distributed summarization. In: Proceedings of the AAAI (2012)
35.
Kazakov, Y., Krtzsch, M., Simank, F.: The incredible ELK. J. Autom. Reason. 53(1), 1–61 (2014)CrossRef
36.
Getoor, L.: Introduction to Statistical Relational Learning. MIT Press, Cambridge (2007)MATH
37.
De Raedt, L.: Logical and Relational Learning. Springer Science and Business Media, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefMATH
38.
Nickel, M., Murphy, K., Tresp, V., Gabrilovich, E.: A review of relational machine learning for knowledge graphs. Proc. IEEE 104(1), 11–33 (2016)CrossRef
39.
Lehmann, J., Hitzler, P.: A refinement operator based learning algorithm for the \(\cal{ALC}\) description logic. In: Blockeel, H., Ramon, J., Shavlik, J., Tadepalli, P. (eds.) ILP 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4894, pp. 147–160. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). doi:10.​1007/​978-3-540-78469-2_​17 CrossRef
40.
41.
Pan, J.Z., Zhao, Y., Xu, Y., Quan, Z., Zhu, M., Gao, Z.: TBox learning from incomplete data by inference in BelNet+. Knowl. Based Syst. 75, 30–40 (2015)CrossRef
42.
Alexopoulos, P., Villazon-Terrazas, B., Pan, J.Z.: Towards vagueness-aware semantic data. In: Proceedings of the URSW (2013)
43.
Alexopoulos, P., Peroni, S., Villazon-Terrazas, B., Pan, J.Z.: Annotating ontologies with descriptions of vagueness. In: Proceedings of the ESWC (2014)
44.
Jekjantuk, N., Pan, J.Z., Alexopoulos, P.: Towards a meta-reasoning framework for reasoning about vagueness in OWL ontologies. In: Proceedings of the ICSC (2016)
45.
Sensoy, M., Fokoue, A., Pan, J.Z., Norman, T., Tang, Y., Oren, N., Sycara, K.: Reasoning about uncertain information and conflict resolution through trust revision. In: Proceedings of the AAMAS (2013)
46.
Stoilos, G., Stamou, G., Pan, J.Z.: Fuzzy extensions of OWL: logical properties and reduction to fuzzy description logics. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 51(6), 656–679 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefMATH
47.
48.
Lecue, F., Pan, J.Z.: Consistent knowledge discovery from evolving ontologies. In: Proceedings of the AAAI (2015)
49.
Ren, Y., Pan, J.Z.: Optimising ontology stream reasoning with truth maintenance system. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM 2011) (2011)
50.
51.
Urbani, J., Margara, A., Jacobs, C., Harmelen, F., Bal, H.: DynamiTE: parallel materialization of dynamic RDF data. In: Alani, H., et al. (eds.) ISWC 2013. LNCS, vol. 8218, pp. 657–672. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi:10.​1007/​978-3-642-41335-3_​41 CrossRef
52.
Ren, Y., Pan, J.Z., Guclu, I., Kollingbaum, M.: A combined approach to incremental reasoning for EL ontologies. In: Ortiz, M., Schlobach, S. (eds.) RR 2016. LNCS, vol. 9898, pp. 167–183. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). doi:10.​1007/​978-3-319-45276-0_​13 CrossRef
53.
Nguyen, H.H., Beel, D., Webster, G., Mellish, C., Pan, J.Z., Wallace, C.: CURIOS mobile: linked data exploitation for tourist mobile apps in rural areas. In: Supnithi, T., Yamaguchi, T., Pan, J.Z., Wuwongse, V., Buranarach, M. (eds.) JIST 2014. LNCS, vol. 8943, pp. 129–145. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). doi:10.​1007/​978-3-319-15615-6_​10 CrossRef
54.
55.
Botoeva, E., Lutz, C., Ryzhikov, V., Wolter, F., Zakharyaschev, M.: Query-based entailment and inseparability for ALC ontologies. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2016), pp. 1001–1007 (2016)
56.
Nguyen, H., Valincius, E., Pan, J.Z.: A power consumption benchmark framework for ontology reasoning on android devices. In: Proceedings of the 4th OWL Reasoner Evaluation Workshop (ORE) (2015)
57.
Guclu, I., Li, Y.-F., Pan, J.Z., Kollingbaum, M.J.: Predicting energy consumption of ontology reasoning over mobile devices. In: Groth, P., Simperl, E., Gray, A., Sabou, M., Krötzsch, M., Lecue, F., Flöck, F., Gil, Y. (eds.) ISWC 2016. LNCS, vol. 9981, pp. 289–304. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). doi:10.​1007/​978-3-319-46523-4_​18 CrossRef
58.
Konev, B., Lutz, C., Walther, D., Wolter, F.: Model-theoretic inseparability and modularity of description logic ontologies. Artif. Intell. 203, 66–103 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefMATH
59.
Konev, B., Lutz, C., Wolter, F., Zakharyaschev, M.: Conservative rewritability of description logic TBoxes. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2016) (2016)
60.
Lutz, C., Wolter, F.: Deciding inseparability and conservative extensions in the description logic EL. J. Symbolic Comput. 45(2), 194–228 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefMATH
61.
Kostylev, E.V., Reutter, J.L., Vrgoč, D.: Containment of data graph queries. In: ICDT, pp. 131–142 (2014)
62.
Kostylev, E.V., Reutter, J.L., Vrgoč, D.: Static analysis of navigational XPath over graph databases. Inf. Process. Lett. 116(7), 467–474 (2016)MathSciNetCrossRefMATH
63.
64.
Baader, F., Bienvenu, M., Lutz, C., Wolter, F.: Query and predicate emptiness in ontology-based data access. J. Artif. Intell. Res. (JAIR) 56, 1–59 (2016)MathSciNetMATH
65.
Bienvenu, M., Bourgaux, C., Goasdoué, F.: Explaining inconsistency-tolerant query answering over description logic knowledge bases. In: Proceedings of the 30th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) (2016)
66.
Bienvenu, M., Bourgaux, C., Goasdoué, F.: Query-driven repairing of inconsistent DL-Lite knowledge bases. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI) (2016)
67.
68.
Denaux, R., Dimitrova, V., Cohn, A.G., Dolbear, C., Hart, G.: Rabbit to OWL: ontology authoring with a CNL-based tool. In: Fuchs, N.E. (ed.) CNL 2009. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5972, pp. 246–264. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). doi:10.​1007/​978-3-642-14418-9_​15 CrossRef
69.
Power, R.: OWL simplified english: a finite-state language for ontology editing. In: Kuhn, T., Fuchs, N.E. (eds.) CNL 2012. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 7427, pp. 44–60. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi:10.​1007/​978-3-642-32612-7_​4 CrossRef
70.
Liebig, T., Noppens, O.: OntoTrack: a semantic approach for ontology authoring. Web Semant. Sci. Serv. Agents World Wide Web 3(2), 116–131 (2005)CrossRef
71.
Denaux, R., Thakker, D., Dimitrova, V., Cohn, A.G.: Interactive semantic feedback for intuitive ontology authoring. In: FOIS, pp. 160–173 (2012)
72.
Uschold, M., Gruninger, M., et al.: Ontologies: principles, methods and applications. Knowl. Eng. Rev. 11(2), 93–136 (1996)CrossRef
73.
Suárez-Figueroa, M.C., Gómez-Pérez, A., Motta, E., Gangemi, A.: Ontology Engineering in a Networked World. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRef
74.
Fernandes, P.C.B., Guizzardi, R.S., Guizzardi, G.: Using goal modeling to capture competency questions in ontology-based systems. J. Inf. Data Manag. 2(3), 527 (2011)
75.
Ren, Y., Parvizi, A., Mellish, C., Pan, J.Z., Deemter, K., Stevens, R.: Towards competency question-driven ontology authoring. In: Presutti, V., d’Amato, C., Gandon, F., d’Aquin, M., Staab, S., Tordai, A. (eds.) ESWC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8465, pp. 752–767. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). doi:10.​1007/​978-3-319-07443-6_​50 CrossRef
76.
Zemmouchi-Ghomari, L., Ghomari, A.R.: Translating natural language competency questions into SPARQL queries: a case study. In: WEB 2013, pp. 81–86 (2013)
77.
Malheiros, Y., Freitas, F.: A method to develop description logic ontologies iteratively based on competency questions: an implementation. In: ONTOBRAS, pp. 142–153 (2013)
78.
Beaver, D.: Presupposition. In: van Benthem, J., ter Meulen, A. (eds.) The Handbook of Logic and Language, pp. 939–1008. Elsevier (1997)
79.
Vigo, M., Jay, C., Stevens, R.: Design insights for the next wave ontology authoring tools. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2014, pp. 1555–1558 (2014). ISBN: 978-1-4503-2473-1. doi:10.​1145/​2556288.​2557284
80.
81.
Vigo, M., Jay, C., Stevens, R.: Constructing conceptual knowledge artefacts: activity patterns in the ontology authoring process. In: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2015, pp. 3385–3394 (2015). ISBN: 978-1-4503-3145-6. doi:10.​1145/​2702123.​2702495
82.
Vigo, M., Jay, C., Stevens, R.: Protégé4US: harvesting ontology authoring data with Protégé. In: Presutti, V., Blomqvist, E., Troncy, R., Sack, H., Papadakis, I., Tordai, A. (eds.) ESWC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8798, pp. 86–99. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). doi:10.​1007/​978-3-319-11955-7_​8
83.
Grau, B.C., Halaschek-Wiener, C., Kazakov, Y., Suntisrivaraporn, B.: Incremental classification of description logics ontologies. J. Autom. Reason. 44(4), 337–369 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefMATH
84.
Gonalves, R.S.: Impact analysis in description logic ontologies. Ph.D. thesis, University of Manchester (2014)
85.
Matentzoglu, N., Vigo, M., Jay, C., Stevens, R.: Making entailment set changes explicit improves the understanding of consequences of ontology authoring actions. In: Blomqvist, E., Ciancarini, P., Poggi, F., Vitali, F. (eds.) EKAW 2016. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 10024, pp. 432–446. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). doi:10.​1007/​978-3-319-49004-5_​28 CrossRef
86.
Parvizi, A., Mellish, C., van Deemter, K., Ren, Y., Pan, J.Z.: Selecting ontology entailments for presentation to users. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Ontology Development, KEOD 2014, Rome, Italy, 21–24 October 2014, pp. 382–387 (2014). doi:10.​5220/​0005136203820387​
Metadaten
Titel
Understanding Author Intentions: Test Driven Knowledge Graph Construction
verfasst von
Jeff Z. Pan
Nico Matentzoglu
Caroline Jay
Markel Vigo
Yuting Zhao
Copyright-Jahr
2017
Buch
Reasoning Web: Logical Foundation of Knowledge Graph Construction and Query Answering

Print ISBN: 978-3-319-49492-0

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-49493-7

Copyright-Jahr: 2017

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49493-7_1