Skip to main content

Constructing RuleML-Based Domain Theories on Top of OWL Ontologies

  • Conference paper
Rules and Rule Markup Languages for the Semantic Web (RuleML 2003)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 2876))

Abstract

Situation Awareness involves the comprehension of the state of a collection of objects in an evolving environment. This not only includes an understanding of the objects’ characteristics but also an awareness of the significant relations that hold among the objects at any point in time. Systems for establishing situation awareness require a knowledge representation for these objects and relations. Traditional ontologies, as defined with a language like DAML/OWL, are commonly used for such purposes. Unfortunately, these languages are insufficient for describing the conditions under which specific relations might hold true, which requires the explicit representation of implications, as is provided by RuleML. This paper describes an approach to knowledge representation for situation awareness employing RuleML-based domain theories constructed over OWL ontologies, presented in the context of its implementation in a Situation Awareness Assistant under development by the authors. Suggestions are also made for additions to the RuleML specification.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Endsley, M., Garland, D.: Situation Awareness, Analysis and Measurement. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, Mahway (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Barwise, J.: Scenes and other situations. J. Philosophy 77, 369–397 (1981)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Barwise, J.: The Situation In Logic. CSLI Lecture Notes, 17 (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  4. : Revisions to the JDL data fusion model. In: Proceedings of SPIE Conf. Sensor Fusion: Architectures, Algorithms and Applications III, April 1999, vol. 3719, pp. 430–441 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Matheus, M.K., Baclawski, K.: Phase I Final Report: A Formal Framework for Situation Awareness (January 2003) AFRL Funding Number: F30602-02-C-0039

    Google Scholar 

  6. Baclawski, K., Kokar, M., Letkowski, J., Matheus, C., Malczewski, M.: Formalization of Situation Awareness. In: Proceedings of the Eleventh OOPSLA Workshop on Behavioral Semantics, November 2002, pp. 1–15 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Matheus, C., Kokar, M., Baclawski, K.: A Core Ontology for Situation Awareness. In: Proceedings of FUSION 2003, Cairns, Queensland, Australia (July 2003)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Matheus, C.J., Baclawski, K., Kokar, M.M.: Derivation of ontological relations using formal methods in a situation awareness scenario. In: Proceedings of SPIE Conference on Mulitsensor, Multisource Information Fusion, April 2003, pp. 298–309 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Specware: Language manual. version 2.0.3. Technical report, Kestrel Institute (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  10. SNARK: SRI’s new automated reasoning kit (2002), http://www.ai.sri.com/stickel/snark.html

  11. Matheus, C., Kokar, M., Baclawski, K.: Phase II Proposal: A Formal Framework for s

    Google Scholar 

  12. OWL Web Ontology Language XML Presentation Syntax, http://www.w3.org/TR/owlxmlsyntax/

  13. The RuleML Initiative, http://www.ruleml.org/

  14. Resource Description Framework (RDF), http://www.w3.org/RDF/

  15. Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.F.: Reducing OWL entailment to description logic satisfiability. In: Fensel, D., Sycara, K., Mylopoulos, J. (eds.) ISWC 2003. LNCS, vol. 2870, pp. 17–29. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. OntoWeb Consortium, OntoWeb Deliverable 1.3: A survey on ontology tools (May 2002), http://www.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/WBS/ysu/publications/OntoWeb_Del_1-3.pdf

  17. Kogut, P.A., Cranefield, S., Hart, L., Dutra, M., Baclawski, K., Kokar, M.M., Smith, J.E.: UML for Ontology Development. The Knowledge Engineering Review 17(1), 61–64 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Horn: On sentences which are true of direct unions of algebras. Journal of Symbolic Logic 16, 14–21 (1951)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. RuleML DTDs, http://www.dfki.uni-kl.de/ruleml/indtd0.8.html

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2003 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Matheus, C.J., Kokar, M.M., Baclawski, K., Letkowski, J. (2003). Constructing RuleML-Based Domain Theories on Top of OWL Ontologies. In: Schröder, M., Wagner, G. (eds) Rules and Rule Markup Languages for the Semantic Web. RuleML 2003. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2876. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-39715-1_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-39715-1_6

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-20361-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-39715-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics