CS 586 Paper Presentation - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 28
About This Presentation
Title:

CS 586 Paper Presentation

Description:

A Comparison of Two Modeling Paradigms in the Semantic Web. Peter F. Patel Schneider ... Polynomial time Query answering. All persons are either male or female ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:72
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 29
Provided by: Amap
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: CS 586 Paper Presentation


1
CS 586 Paper Presentation
  • Amap A. Bhatt

2
Paper Title
  • A Comparison of Two Modeling Paradigms in the
    Semantic Web
  • Peter F. Patel Schneider
  • Ian Horrocks

3
QUICK RECAP
  • The Semantic Web?
  • Information was given well defined meaning to
    form logical web of data

4
QUICK RECAP
  • Ontology ?
  • A Data model that represents a set of concepts
    within a domain and the relationship between
    these concepts

5
PAPER TOPIC
  • A Comparison of the 2 Modeling Paradigms in the
    Semantic Web
  • Classical Paradigm
  • Datalog Paradigm

6
Classical Paradigm
  • Based on standard Logic
  • Propositional Logic
  • First Order Logic
  • Description Logic

7
Classical Paradigm
  • Embodied in
  • OWL Web Ontology Language
  • RDF Resource Description Framework

8
Datalog Paradigm
  • Based on Object-oriented database notions
  • Embodied in
  • Previous RDF version
  • OWL Flight

9
DIFFERENCES
  • Computational Aspects
  • Expressive power
  • Naturalness of Modeling

10
Which Paradigm is Better?
  • Better suited for Semantic Web ?
  • OWL DL vs. OWL Flight ?
  • Underlying notions ?

11
Classical Paradigm
  • Meaning of Information
  • Mapping between Information Consistent
    Interpretation

12
Classical Paradigm
  • Domain being Modeled Abstract representation
    of Objects and relationships between them

13
Classical Paradigm
  • Information and Interpretation as separate
    Entities.
  • More than 1 interpretation possible.
  • Query checking some situation that holds in
    all interpretations

14
Classical Paradigm
  • Use of Axioms
  • Example. Tim Pam ? USC

15
Datalog Paradigm
  • Closed World Assumption
  • Unique Name Assumption
  • Result gt Single Model (1 to 1)

16
Datalog Paradigm
  • Formalization of the DB Approach
  • Horn like rules to capture Schema Data
  • Person(y) ? Person(x) Parent(x,y)

17
Datalog Paradigm
  • Query checking ? checking the single Model
  • Tradeoff Ease vs. Scope

18
Datalog Paradigm Tradeoff
  • Polynomial time Query answering
  • All persons are either male or female
  • All persons have exactly 2 parents

19
Identifiers Open World
  • Identifier uniqueness
  • Epistemic queries and constructs.

20
Incomplete Information
  • John Smith knows 2 people
  • D.O.B P.O.B for every person
  • Person(John_Smith)

21
Constraints
  • Adding new Information
  • Datalog limitations

22
Constraints
  • Rule
  • Mother(x,y)? Person(x)
  • Constraint Rule
  • ?Person(x)Parent (x,x)

23
Datatypes
  • Datatypes Classes
  • Datatype values Identifiers
  • 1 lt 2
  • 1 and 1.0

24
Role of Tools
  • Ontology Building Tools with Good User Interfaces
  • Characteristics of good Tool?

25
Complexity
  • Classical vs. Datalog
  • Datalog Tradeoff
  • Scope vs. Reasoning Time

26
Integrating DL and Rules
  • Safety Condition
  • Impact on Complexity

27
Extending Classical Paradigm
  • Local Closed / Unique name assumption by using
    Constructs
  • Extensions to OWL DL

28
Discussion Issues
  • Inherent openness of Semantic Web
  • Solution Ontology Tools.
  • (add epistemic constructs to OWL)
  • Right Balance
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com