A plausible inference prototype for the Semantic Web

Journal of Intelligent Information Systems

Volumn 26, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 227-246

  Russomanno, David J ^a  

^a University of Memphis   (United States)

Author keywords

Composition of relations; Plausible inference; RDF; Semantic Web

Indexed keywords

DISTRIBUTED COMPUTER SYSTEMS; INFERENCE ENGINES; INFORMATION ANALYSIS; KNOWLEDGE BASED SYSTEMS; METADATA; QUERY LANGUAGES; SEMANTICS; SOFTWARE PROTOTYPING;

COMPOSITION OF RELATIONS; PLAUSIBLE INFERENCE; RESOURCE DESCRIPTION FRAMEWORK (RDF); SEMANTIC WEB;

WORLD WIDE WEB;

EID: 33747036465     PISSN: 09259902     EISSN: 15737675     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10844-006-0369-1     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Allen, J. (1984). Towards a general theory of action and time. Artificial Intelligence, 23, 123-154.
2. Anon. (2003). SWI-Prolog, http://www.swi-prolog.org (current January 2005).
3. Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, J., & Lassila, O. (2001, May). The Semantic Web: A new form of Web content that is meaningful to computers will unleash a revolution of new possibilities. Scientific American, 34-43.
4. Boley, H. (2000). Relationships between logic programming and RDF. Proceedings of the Pacific Rim Conference on Intelligent Information Agents, Melbourne, http://www.dfki.uni-kl.de/~boley/rdfphtml/ (current January 2005).
5. Brachman, R. J. (1983). What IS-A is and isn't: An analysis of taxonomic links in semantic networks. Computer, 16(10), 30-36.
6. Brickley, D. & Guha, R. V. (2003, January). RDF Vocabulary Description Language 1.0: RDF Schema. W3C Working Draft, http://www.w3.org/TR/ rdf-schema/ (current January 2005).
7. Calvanes, D., De Giacomo, G., & Lenzerini, M. (2001). A framework for ontology integration. Online Proceedings Semantic Web Working Symposium, Stanford University, California, http://www.semanticweb.org/SWWS/program/index. html (current January 2005).
8. Chaffin, R., & Herrmann, D. (1987). Relation element theory: A new account of the representation and processing of semantic relations. In D. Gorfein & R. Hoffman (Eds.), Memory and Learning: The Ebbinghaus Centennial Conference (pp. 221-245). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
9. Cohen, P., & Loiselle, C. (1988). Beyond ISA: Structures for plausible inference in semantic networks. Proceedings of the Seventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 415-420). St. Paul, Minnesota: AAAI.
10. Conen, W., & Klapsing, R. (2000). A logical interpretation of RDF. Linköping Electronic Articles in Computer and Information Science, 5(13), 1-12.
11. Dean, M. et al. (2002, November 12). Web Ontology Language (OWL) Reference Version 1.0., W3C Working Draft, http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD- owl-ref-20021112/ (current January 2005).
12. Decker, S., Brickley, D., Saarela, J., & Angele, J. (1998). A query and inference service for RDF. Online Proceedings of the QL'98 - The Query Languages Workshop, Boston, Massachusetts, http://www.w3.org/TandS/QL/QL98/pp/ queryservice.htrnl (current January 2005).
13. Grassmann, W., & Tremblay, J. (1996). Logic and discrete mathematics. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
14. Guha, R. V. (2002). rdfDB: An RDF Database, http://www.guha.com/rdfdb/ (current January 2005).
15. Huhns, M., & Stephens, L. (1989). Plausible inferencing using extended composition. Proceedings of the Eleventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 1420-1425). Detroit, Michigan.
16. Kashyap, V., & Borgida, A. (2003). Representing the UMLS® semantic network using OWL. Proceedings of the 2nd International Semantic Web Conference (pp. 1-16) Sanibel Island, FL. Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer.
17. Klein, M. (2001). Combining and relating ontologies: An analysis of problems and solutions. Workshop on Ontologies and Information Sharing, International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 53-62) Seattle, Washington.
18. Kothari, C., & Russomanno, D. (2004). Relation elements for the Semantic Web. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Conceptual Structures (ICCS 2004) (pp. 275-286) Huntsville, Alabama. Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer.
19. Kothari, C. et al. (2003). UofM_EECE Ontology, http://www.eece.memphis. edu/ksl/uofm_eece.xml (current January 2005).
20. Kuczora, P. W. & Cosby, S. J. (1989). Implementation of meronymic (part-whole) inheritance for semantic networks. Knowledge Based Systems, 2(4), 219-227.
21. Landis, T. Y., Herrmann, D. J., & Chaffin, R. (1989). Development differences in the comprehension of semantic relations. Zeitschrift fur Psychologie, 2(4), 219-227.
22. Lassila, O., & Swick, R. (1999, February). Resource Description Framework (RDF) Model and Syntax Specification. W3C Recommendation, http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax/ (current January 2005).
23. Lenat, D. (1995). Cyc: A large-scale investment in knowledge infrastructure. Communications of the ACM, 38(1), 33-38.
24. Niles, I., & Pease, A. (2001). Towards a standard upper ontology. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems (pp. 2-9) Ogunquit, Maine.
25. Reed, S. L., & Lenat, D. B. (2002). Mapping Ontologies into Cyc. AAAI 2002 Conference Workshop on Ontologies for the Semantic Web, Edmonton, Canada, http://www.cyc.com/doc/white_papers/mapping-ontologies-into-cyc_v31.pdf (current January 2005).
26. Schubert, L. K., Papalaskaris, M. A., & Taugher, J. (1983, October). Determining type, part, color, and time relationships. IEEE Computer, 53-60.
27. Sintek, M., & Decker, S. (2002). TRIPLE - a query, inference, and transformation language for the Semantic Web. First International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC) (pp. 364-378) Sardinia, Italy. Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer.
28. Sowa, J. (2002). Knowledge representation: Logical, philosophical and computational foundations. Pacific Grove, California: Brooks/Cole.
29. Stephens, L., & Chen, Y. (1996). Principles for organizing semantic relations in large knowledge bases. IEEE Transactions of Knowledge and Data Engineering, 8(3), 492-496.
30. Storey, V. C. (1991). Meronymic relationships. Journal of Database Administration, 2(3), 22-35.
31. Storey, V. C. (1993). Understanding semantic relationships. The International Journal on Very Large Data Bases, 2(4), 455-488.
32. Wielemaker, J. (2003a). SWI-Prolog RDF Parser, http://www.swi-prolog.org/ packages/rdf2pl.html (current January 2005).
33. Wielemaker, J. (2003b). SWI-Prolog SGML/XML Parser, http://www.swi- prolog.org/packages/sgml2pl.html (current January 2005).
34. Wielemaker, J., Schreiber, G., & Wielinga, B. (2003). Prolog-based infrastructure for RDF: Scalability and performance. Proceedings of the Second International Semantic Web Conference (pp. 644-658) Sanibel Island, Florida. Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer.
35. Winston, P., Morton, E., Chaffin, R., & Herrmann, D. (1987). A taxonomy of part-whole relations. Cognitive Science, 11, 417-444.