arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv周末暂无论文更新,休息一下吧,周末愉快~~
arXiv cs/9703101cs.AI
收藏

描述逻辑中概念定义的统一框架

A Uniform Framework for Concept Definitions in Description Logics

G. DeGiacomo, M. Lenzerini

摘要:

数据库和人工智能中用于描述应用领域的大多数现代形式主义都是基于类(或概念)和类之间关系的概念。这种形式主义的一个有趣的特征是定义类的可能性,即,提供一组属性,精确地描述类的实例。最近的许多文章指出,有几种方法可以为包含某种递归的类定义赋予意义。在本文中,我们认为,而不是选择一个单一的风格的语义,我们取得了更好的结果,通过采用一种形式主义,允许不同的语义共存。我们证明了我们的论点的可行性,通过提出一个知识表示的形式主义,描述逻辑muALCQ,与上述特点。除了用于合取、析取、否定、量词和限定数限制的构造之外,muALCQ还包括特殊的不动点构造来表达(适当解释的)递归定义。这些结构使通常的基于框架的描述相结合的递归数据结构,如有向无环图,列表,流等的定义,我们建立了几个属性的muALCQ,包括可判定性和推理的计算复杂性,通过制定一个对应的特定模态逻辑的程序称为模态μ演算。

英文摘要:

Most modern formalisms used in Databases and Artificial Intelligence for describing an application domain are based on the notions of class (or concept) and relationship among classes. One interesting feature of such formalisms is the possibility of defining a class, i.e., providing a set of properties that precisely characterize the instances of the class. Many recent articles point out that there are several ways of assigning a meaning to a class definition containing some sort of recursion. In this paper, we argue that, instead of choosing a single style of semantics, we achieve better results by adopting a formalism that allows for different semantics to coexist. We demonstrate the feasibility of our argument, by presenting a knowledge representation formalism, the description logic muALCQ, with the above characteristics. In addition to the constructs for conjunction, disjunction, negation, quantifiers, and qualified number restrictions, muALCQ includes special fixpoint constructs to express (suitably interpreted) recursive definitions. These constructs enable the usual frame-based descriptions to be combined with definitions of recursive data structures such as directed acyclic graphs, lists, streams, etc. We establish several properties of muALCQ, including the decidability and the computational complexity of reasoning, by formulating a correspondence with a particular modal logic of programs called the modal mu-calculus.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑