Logics for Data and Knowledge Representation: midterm Exam 2013

Similar documents
Description Logic. Eva Mráková,

Description Logics and OWL

Logik für Informatiker Logic for computer scientists. Ontologies: Description Logics

OWL a glimpse. OWL a glimpse (2) requirements for ontology languages. requirements for ontology languages

Semantic Web Test

INF3580/4580 Semantic Technologies Spring 2017

Description Logic: A Formal Foundation for Ontology Languages and Tools

OWL DL / Full Compatability

A faceted lightweight ontology for Earthquake Engineering Research Projects and Experiments

Simplified Approach for Representing Part-Whole Relations in OWL-DL Ontologies

Semantics. Matthew J. Graham CACR. Methods of Computational Science Caltech, 2011 May 10. matthew graham

Knowledge Representations. How else can we represent knowledge in addition to formal logic?

Presented By Aditya R Joshi Neha Purohit

Description Logics as Ontology Languages for Semantic Webs

OWL and tractability. Based on slides from Ian Horrocks and Franz Baader. Combining the strengths of UMIST and The Victoria University of Manchester

Ontologies and the Web Ontology Language OWL

H1 Spring B. Programmers need to learn the SOAP schema so as to offer and use Web services.

Knowledge-Driven Video Information Retrieval with LOD

Ontologies and OWL. Riccardo Rosati. Knowledge Representation and Semantic Technologies

l A family of logic based KR formalisms l Distinguished by: l Decidable fragments of FOL l Closely related to Propositional Modal & Dynamic Logics

Bryan Smith May 2010

OWL 2 Profiles. An Introduction to Lightweight Ontology Languages. Markus Krötzsch University of Oxford. Reasoning Web 2012

Genetic Programming. and its use for learning Concepts in Description Logics

INF3580 Semantic Technologies Spring 2012

COMP718: Ontologies and Knowledge Bases

OWL 2 The Next Generation. Ian Horrocks Information Systems Group Oxford University Computing Laboratory

Local Closed World Reasoning with OWL 2

Description Logics. Description Logics and Databases

INF3580/4580 Semantic Technologies Spring 2017

! model construction

For return on 19 January 2018 (late submission: 2 February 2018)

Week 4. COMP62342 Sean Bechhofer, Uli Sattler

Ontology mutation testing

BUILDING THE SEMANTIC WEB

Semantic reasoning for dynamic knowledge bases. Lionel Médini M2IA Knowledge Dynamics 2018

AI Fundamentals: Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. Maria Simi

OWL 2 Profiles. An Introduction to Lightweight Ontology Languages. Маркус Крёч (Markus Krötzsch) University of Oxford. KESW Summer School 2012

Introduction to Protégé. Federico Chesani, 18 Febbraio 2010

Knowledge Engineering with Semantic Web Technologies

Semantic Web. MPRI : Web Data Management. Antoine Amarilli Friday, January 11th 1/29

! Assessed assignment 1 Due 17 Feb. 3 questions Level 10 students answer Q1 and one other

logic importance logic importance (2) logic importance (3) specializations of logic Horn logic specializations of logic RDF and OWL

Reasoning with the Web Ontology Language (OWL)

Propositional Logic. Andreas Klappenecker

Reasoning and Query Answering in Description Logics

Structure of This Presentation

INF3580 Semantic Technologies Spring 2012

An Introduction to the Semantic Web. Jeff Heflin Lehigh University

Knowledge Sharing Among Heterogeneous Agents

Semantic Web Technologies

SEMANTICS. Retrieval by Meaning

OWL as a Target for Information Extraction Systems

Knowledge Representation for the Semantic Web

Today: RDF syntax. + conjunctive queries for OWL. KR4SW Winter 2010 Pascal Hitzler 3

Orchestrating Music Queries via the Semantic Web

Querying Data through Ontologies

OWL-DBC The Arrival of Scalable and Tractable OWL Reasoning for Enterprise Knowledge Bases

SEMANTIC WEB AND COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF INFERENCE ENGINES

The Semantic Web Explained

Today s Plan. INF3580 Semantic Technologies Spring Model-theoretic semantics, a quick recap. Outline

Semantic Web Systems Ontologies Jacques Fleuriot School of Informatics

Nonstandard Inferences in Description Logics

4.8 Huffman Codes. These lecture slides are supplied by Mathijs de Weerd

On the Reduction of Dublin Core Metadata Application Profiles to Description Logics and OWL

Semantic Web and Natural Language Processing

Lecture 3: Graphs and flows

Deep integration of Python with Semantic Web technologies

(Conceptual) Clustering methods for the Semantic Web: issues and applications

Chapter 13: Advanced topic 3 Web 3.0

Ontologies. COMP 210: Lecture 26: Ontologies. Ontologies. Ontologies. Winston s ZOOKEEPER ZOOKEEPER 4/23/2010

Adding formal semantics to the Web

Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning

An R2RML Mapping Management API in Java. Making an API Independent of its Dependencies

FOUNDATIONS OF SEMANTIC WEB TECHNOLOGIES

model (ontology) and every DRS and CMS server has a well-known address (IP and port).

On the Scalability of Description Logic Instance Retrieval

Semantic Web Rules. - Tools and Languages - Holger Knublauch. Tutorial at Rule ML 2006, Athens, GA

A Semantic Model for Federated Queries Over a Normalized Corpus

TOOP: A Common Semantic Model for the Once-Only Principle Jack Verhoosel, TNO June 14, 2018

Exercise 3.1 (Win-Move Game: Draw Nodes) Consider again the Win-Move-Game. There, WinNodes and LoseNodes have been axiomatized.

Mandatory exercises. INF3580/4580 Semantic Technologies Spring 2017 Lecture 12: OWL: Loose Ends. Outline. Make it simple!

Racer - An Inference Engine for the Semantic Web

Semantics. KR4SW Winter 2011 Pascal Hitzler 1

DAML+OIL: an Ontology Language for the Semantic Web

CC LA WEB DE DATOS PRIMAVERA Lecture 4: Web Ontology Language (I) Aidan Hogan

Semantic Web. Ontology Pattern. Gerd Gröner, Matthias Thimm. Institute for Web Science and Technologies (WeST) University of Koblenz-Landau

Using ontologies function management

Lightweight Semantic Web Motivated Reasoning in Prolog

Helmi Ben Hmida Hannover University, Germany

On the use of Abstract Workflows to Capture Scientific Process Provenance

Ontology Design: OWL Constructs. Tutor: Aldo Gangemi Lecture LEX09 Fiesole, Italy

Modularity in Ontologies: Introduction (Part A)

Ontological Modeling: Part 2

ORM and Description Logic. Dr. Mustafa Jarrar. STARLab, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Introduction (Why this tutorial)

Knowledge Representation for the Semantic Web Lecture 1: Introduction

Semantic Web. Part 3 The ontology layer 1: Ontologies, Description Logics, and OWL

A Formal Definition of RESTful Semantic Web Services. Antonio Garrote Hernández María N. Moreno García

Knowledge Representation for the Semantic Web

Programming THE SEMANTIC WEB. Build an application upon Semantic Web models. Brief overview of Apache Jena and OWL-API.

Semantic Nets, Frames, World Representation. CS W February, 2004

Transcription:

1. [6 PT] Say (mark with an X) whether the following statements are true (T) or false (F). a) In a lightweight ontology there are is-a and part-of relations T F b) Semantic matching is a technique to compute a mapping between T F nodes whose labels have similar meaning in two ontologies c) DERA is a methodology based on the faceted approach for the T F development of classification ontologies d) The Semantic Web infrastructure provides a data model supporting T F a single entity can be distributed over the Web e) RDF allows relationship propagation through rdfs:subclassof T F f) OWL 2 RL (profile) was developed to be implemented using rule based technologies such as rule extended DBMSs T F 2. [6 PT] Translate the following natural language sentences in the DL language with lowest expressiveness possible (e.g. AL, ALC, FL0 ) and say which of the languages you used: a. A parent is a person having at least one child b. Birds have 2 wings c. Male and Female are disjoint d. Germans do not have Italian friends and friends having Italian friends e. The color of a banana can be only yellow or red f. Facebook users can only post photos about their friends PARENT PERSON haschild. (AL) BIRD 2 WING 2 WING (ALN) MALE FEMALE (AL) GERMAN FRIEND-OF. ( ITALIAN FRIEND-OF.ITALIAN) (ALCE) BANANA COLOR.{yellow, red} (FL0) FACEBOOK-USER USER POST.FRIEND-PHOTO (FL0)

3. [2 PT] Formally explain the separation of duties RelBAC rule with an example in Description Logic See slides 4. [3 PT] List and provide a brief description of the four basic ABox reasoning services See slides

5. [4 PT] Using the tableau calculus, say whether the DL formula below is satisfiable: person ( person eats. plant) eats.(plant dairy) Motivate your answer with a proof. If satisfiable, provide a possible ABox. By -rule we put into the ABox: person(z), ( person eats. plant)(z), eats.(plant dairy)(z), (1) person(z) is already an ABox assertion. (2) ( person eats. plant)(z) by -rule has to be split into: (2.1) person(z) that is clearly in contradiction with (1), therefore we backtrack; (2.2) eats. plant(z) by -rule we add into the ABox: eats(z, y), plant(y) (3) eats.(plant dairy) (z) by -rule we add into the ABox: eats(z, plant(x) dairy(x)) (in fact person(z) is already in the ABox), that by -rule has to be split into: (3.1) plant(y) given that eats(z, y) is in the ABox because of (2.2), that is clearly in contradiction with plant(y) (2.2) (3.2) dairy(x) Thus, there is at least a path which proves the satisfiability of the formula, for instance: (1) (2) (2.1) (3) (3.2) This path generates the ABox A = { person(z), eats(z, y), plant(y), dairy(x) }

6. [4 PT] Represent the following statements in RDF: a) If Einstein is a researcher, he is also an investigator, a manofscience and a scientist. b) If John is either an experimenter or a fieldworker or a postdoc, he is also a researcher. Consult RDF modeling in slide 21 of the Resource Description Framework lecture 7. [4 PT] Suppose that in a family tree, relations such as the following ones are functional. a) :haspaternalgrandfather b) :haspaternalgrandmother Represent them in a suitable Semantic Web language and demonstrate their use with necessary entity-entity axioms. See functional property in slide 8 of the OWL lecture

8. [4 PT] Suppose that an RDF model represents information about various entities including books. The model is created using standard vocabularies (e.g., Dublic Core). Write a SPARQL query that separates information about books i.e. title, author, date of publication and publisher (if any) and creates another RDF model that is a subset of the original one. PREFIX dc: <dc namespace> CONSTRUCT {?book dc:creator?author.?book dc:title?booktitle.?book dc:date?dateofpublication.?book dc:publisher?pub } WHERE {?book dc:creator?author.?book dc:title?booktitle.?book dc:date?dateofpublication. OPTIONAL {?book dc:publisher?pub} }