Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

International Conference on Conceptual Structures

ICCS 1998: Conceptual Structures: Theory, Tools and Applications pp 80–93Cite as

A semantic validation of conceptual graphs

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 1453))

Abstract

Validation is an important part of the research work on knowledge based systems. Three kinds of validation have been studied: syntactic validation, logical validation and semantic validation. We are interested in these three kinds of validation for knowledge based systems based on conceptual graphs. This paper focuses on semantic validation. We present a method to check whether a knowledge base is semantically valid. This is done with respect to constraints. We present two types of constraints, minimal and maximal descriptive constraints. Each of them is associated with a conceptual graph G. It allows one to specify that if there exist specializations of G in the knowledge base, then these specializations must respect some conditions. For each kind of descriptive constraints we propose a way of checking if a knowledge base is valid and define their logical semantics. Finally we compare descriptive constraints with other extensions of the conceptual graph model.

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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. J.P. Laurent. Proposals for a valid terminology in KBS validation. European Conference of Artificial Intelligence, pages 829–834, August 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  2. A. Ginsberg. Knowledge-base reduction: a new approach to checking knowledge bases for inconsistency and redundancy. AAAI, pages 585–589, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  3. P. Meseguer. Verification of multi-level rule-based expert systems. AAAI, pages 323–328, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  4. A. Preece and N. Zlaterava. A state of the art in automated validation of knowledge-based systems. Expert Systems with Applications, 7(2): 151–167, 1994.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. S. Loiseau. Checking and restoring the consistency of knowledge databases. Encyclopedia of Computer Science and Technologie, 36: 15–34, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  6. C. Haouche and J. Charlet. KBS validation: a knowledge acquisition perspective. ECAI, pages 433–437, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  7. M.C. Rousset. Knowledge formal specifications for formal verification: a proposal based on the integration of different logical formalism. European Conference of Artificial Intelligence, pages 739–743, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  8. P. Hors and M.C. Rousset. Modeling and verifying complex objects: A declarative approach based on description logics. European Conference of Artificial Intelligence, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  9. J.F. Sowa. Conceptual structures: information processing in mind and machine. Addison Wesley Publishing Company, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  10. M.L. Mugnier and M. Chein. Représenter des connaissances et raisonner avec des graphes. Revue d'Intelligence Artificielle, 10(1): 7–56, 1996.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. M. Chein and M.L. Mugnier. Conceptual graphs: fundamental notions. Revue d'Intelligence Artificielle, 6(4): 365–406, 1992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. M. Leclère. Les connaissances du niveau terminologique du modèle des graphes conceptuels: construction et exploitation. PhD thesis, Université Montpellier II, Decembre 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  13. F. Bouali. Les systemes terminologiques et la relation partie de. Rapport de stage de DEA, Université PARIS-SUD, centre d'Orsay, Septembre 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  14. M.L. Mugnier and M. Chein. Characterization and algorithmic recognition of canonical conceptual graphs. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Conceptual Structures, ICCS'93, Quebec City, Canada, L.N.A.I. 699, pages 294–311. Springer-Verlag, August 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  15. M. Wermelinger. A different perspective on canonicity. In Proceedings of the 5th Int. Conf. on Conceptual Structures, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 1257, pages 110–124, Seattle, U.S.A., 1997. Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  16. P. Kocura. Conceptual graph canonicity and semantic constraints. In Gerard Ellis Peter W. Eklund and Graham Mann, editors, Conceptual Structures: Knowledge Representation as Interlingua—Auxilliary Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Conceptual Structures, pages 133–145, Sydney, Australia, August 1996. Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  17. G. W. Mineau and R. Missaoui. The representation of semantic constraints in conceptual graph systems. In Proceedings of the 5th Int. Conf. on Conceptual Structures, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 1257, pages 138–152, Seattle, U.S.A., 1997. Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  18. J. Dibie. Validation des graphes conceptuels. Rapport de stage de DEA, Université Paris IX, Dauphine, Paris, Septembre 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  19. J. Dibie, O. Haemmerlé, and S. Loiseau. Une validation logique des graphes conceptuels. Rapport interne, Institut National Agronomique, Paris, Janvier 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  20. O. Haemmerlé. CoGITo: une plate-forme de développement de logiciels sur les graphes conceptuels. PhD thesis, Université Montpellier II, Janvier 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  21. P. Martin and L. Alpay. Conceptual structures and structured documents. In Proceedings of the 4th Int. Conf. on Conceptual Structures, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 1115, Springer-Verlag, pages 145–159, Sydney, Australia, August 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  22. C. Bos, B. Botella, and P. Vanheeghe. Modelling and simulating human behaviours with conceptual graphs. In Proceedings of the 5th Int. Conf. on Conceptual Structures, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 1257, pages 275–289, Seattle, U.S.A., 1997. Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Département OMIP, INA-PG, 16, rue Claude Bernard, F-75231, Paris Cedex 05, France

    Juliette Dibie, Ollivier Haemmerlé & Stéphane Loiseau

  2. LAMSADE, Université de Paris IX - Dauphine, Place du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, F-75775, Paris Cedex 16, France

    Juliette Dibie

  3. LRI - CNRS, Bât 490, Université Paris XI - Orsay, F-91405, Orsay Cedex, France

    Stéphane Loiseau

Authors
  1. Juliette Dibie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ollivier Haemmerlé
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stéphane Loiseau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Marie-Laure Mugnier Michel Chein

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1998 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Dibie, J., Haemmerlé, O., Loiseau, S. (1998). A semantic validation of conceptual graphs. In: Mugnier, ML., Chein, M. (eds) Conceptual Structures: Theory, Tools and Applications. ICCS 1998. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 1453. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0054906

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0054906

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-64791-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-68673-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation