Abstract
An important notion for representation formalisms of natural language semantics, is a subsumption hierarchy. Therefore a precise definition of subsumption is necessary. We shall argue that the usual solution of providing an extensional semantics and mapping subsumption onto set-inclusion, is not satisfactory. The problem is that extensions lose track of the structure. A better solution is used for conceptual graphs [13], where derivation rules define generalization.
In this paper we shall introduce knowledge graphs, and give a definition of subsumption, that does keep track of the structure. Moreover, because structural subsumption can be tested with a tractable algorithm, the fundamental tradeoff between expressiveness and complexity of inferences [10] does not occur.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
H. Aït-Kaci. An algebraic semantics approach to the effective resolution of type equations. Theor. Comp. Sc., 45:293–351, 1986.
A.R. Anderson and N.D. Belnap. Entailment: The Logic of Relevance and Necessity. Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1975.
R. R. Bakker. Knowledge Graphs: representation and structuring of scientific knowledge. PhD thesis, University of Twente, Enschede, 1987.
J. Barwise and J. Perry. Situations and Attitudes. MIT Press, 1983.
R. J. Brachman. On the epistemological status of semantic networks. In N. V. Findler, editor, Associative Networks Representation and Use of Knowledge by Computers, pages 3–50. Academic Press, Inc., 1979.
R. J. Brachman and H. J. Levesque. The tractability of subsumption in frame-based description languages. In Proceedings of AAAI-84, pages 34–37. Austin, 1984.
B. Hollunder, W. Nutt, and M. Schmidt-Schauß. Subsumption algorithms for conception description languages. In Proceedings of 9th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, London, 1990, Pitman Publishing.
M.K. Jackman. Inference and the conceptual graph knowledge representation language. In S. Moralee, editor, Research and development in Expert Systems IV, Proceedings of Expert Systems '87. Cambridge University Press, 1988.
M. Kay. Parsing in functional unification grammar. In D. Dowty, L. Kartunnen, and A. Zwicky, editors, Natural Language Parsing. Cambridge University Press, 1985.
H. J. Levesque and R. J. Brachman. A fundamental tradeoff in knowledge representation and reasoning. In R. J. Brachman and H. J. Levesque, editors, Readings in Knowledge Representation, pages 41–70. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc., 1985.
M. Schmidt-Schauß. Subsumption in KL-ONE is undecidable. In R. Brachman, H. Levesque, and R. Reiter, editors, Proceedings of First International Conference on Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc., 1989.
J.G. Schmolze. Terminological knowledge representation systems. In R. Brachman, H. Levesque, and R. Reiter, editors, Proceedings of First International Conference on Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc., 1989.
J. F. Sowa. Conceptual Structures: Information Processing in Mind and Machine. Addison-Wesley, Reading, 1984.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1991 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Willems, M. (1991). Subsumption in knowledge graphs. In: Boley, H., Richter, M.M. (eds) Processing Declarative Knowledge. PDK 1991. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 567. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0013521
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0013521
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-55033-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-46667-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive