l ogics for d ata and k nowledge r epresentation
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
L ogics for D ata and K nowledge R epresentation

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 30

L ogics for D ata and K nowledge R epresentation - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

L ogics for D ata and K nowledge R epresentation. Exercise 3: DLs. Outline. Modeling Previous Logics DL RelBAC OWL Comprehensive. Modeling Procedure. Abstraction of the world to a mental model Clarify the domain of interest Clarify the relations Choose/build a logic

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' L ogics for D ata and K nowledge R epresentation' - bao

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
  • Modeling
  • Previous Logics
  • DL
  • RelBAC
  • OWL
  • Comprehensive
modeling procedure
Modeling Procedure
  • Abstraction of the world to a mental model
    • Clarify the domain of interest
    • Clarify the relations
  • Choose/build a logic
  • Build the theory of the mental model with the logic
  • Reason about the theory

<?xml version=“1.0”?>







what distincts dl from previous logics
What distincts DL from Previous Logics?
  • PL
    • Logical constructors
    • Interpretations
  • ClassL
    • Logical constructors
    • Interpretations
  • Ground ClassL
    • Individuals
  • DL
    • All?
expressiveness of dl
Expressiveness of DL
  • Binary Relations?


    • Subsumption?

Of course!

More than concept subsumption!


    • Else?
      • Some
      • Only
      • Number
description logics
Description Logics
  • Propositional DL VS. ClassL
  • DL VS. Ground ClassL
  • Role Constructors
    • ⊓⊔¬≡⊑

In addition to concept constructors

dl modeling
DL Modeling

Model the following NL sentences with DLs.

  • “Children with only a single parent and no siblings”


  • “Friends that likes foreign movies but only Disney cartoons”


  • “A binary tree is a tree with at most two sub-trees that are themselves binary trees.”


  • “The monkeys that can grasp the banana are those that have climbed onto the box at position of the banana”


dl reasoning tbox
DL Reasoning: TBox
  • Prove the following tautology:

¬(C⊓D)≡¬C⊔¬D ¬∀R.C≡∃R.¬C

  • Venn Diagrams
    • Concepts:

Universal, Arbitrary non-empty set, Empty set

    • Relations:

Intersection, union, disjoint

  • Tableaux
    • An algorithm to verify satisfiability.
    • Rules:


c d c d















r c r c


=Δ-{x| ∀y R(x,y)→C(y) }

= {x|¬(∀y R(x,y)→C(y) )}

={x|∃y ¬(R(x,y)→C(y) )}

={x|∃y ¬(¬R(x,y)∨C(y) )}

={x|∃y R(x,y)∧¬C(y) )}


dl reasoning abox 1
DL Reasoning: ABox (1)
  • Given the interpretation I with the domain ΔI={d,e,f,g}

{d,e,f}⊑A B(f) R(d,e) R(e,g)

S(g,d) S(g,g) S(e,f)

In which A,B are concept and R,S are roles.

  • Please find the instances of the ALC-concept C as
    • A⊔B
    • ∃S.¬A
    • ∀S.A
    • ∃S.∃S.∃S.∃S.A
    • ∀T.A⊓∀T.¬A













dl reasoning abox 2
DL Reasoning: ABox (2)
  • Let an ABox A consists of the following assertions:

Likes(Bob, Ann) Likes(Bob, Cate)

Neighbor(Ann, Cate) Neighbor(Cate, David)

Blond(Ann) ¬Blond(David)

where Neighbor is a symmetric and transitive role.

    • Does A have a model?
    • Is Bob an instance of the following concepts in all models of A?



exercise on tableaux
Exercise on Tableaux
  • The tableaux is an algorithm to check satisfiability.
    • If all branches of your tableaux are open, then?

You cannot say it is valid! Why?


    • If all branches of your tableaux are closed, then?

You can say it is unsatisfiable

    • What can we do with tableaux?

To prove the satisfiability of a concept.

tableaux cont
Tableaux cont.
  • Rules

  • Exercises
    • Are these subsumptions valid?

∀R.A⊓∀R.B⊑∀R.(A⊓B) ∃R.A⊓∃R.B⊑∃R.(A⊓B)

    • Decide whether the following subsumption holds


with T={C≡ (∃R.B)⊓¬A, D≡¬(∃R.A)⊓∃R.(∃R.B)}

relbac domain specific dls
RelBAC: Domain Specific DLs
  • Syntax
    • Nc: subject groups, object types;
    • Ni: individual subjects, individual objects;
    • Nr: permissions
    • DL constructors and formation rules
  • Semantics
    • Hierarchy
    • Permission assignment
    • Ground assignment
    • Chinese Wall
    • SoD
    • High Level SoD
    • Queries



relbac modeling
RelBAC Modeling
  • “The LDKR course consists of:
    • For persons: Prof. Giunchiglia and TA Zhang as lecturers, Student Tin, Hoa, Parorali, Sartori, Chen, Gao, Lu, Zhang;
    • For online materials: syllabus, slides for lectures, references, exercises and keys, exam questions, results and marks.”
  • We know that,
    • Slides can be updated only by professors or TA;
    • Students can download all materials but only update keys to exercises.
    • Each student should upload exam result to the site that TA can read and check for propose marks which will be finally decided by professor(s).
ldkr modeling answer
LDKR Modeling Answer





chinese wall property
Chinese Wall Property
  • Chinese Wall (CW)

“Originally no one has any access to anything; then some requests are accepted and someone is allowed to perform some operation on something; from then on, those has been allowed to access should not be allowed to access on those things arousing conflict of interests.”

  • Conflict of Interests (COI)

Resources in COI should be avoided access for disclosure of information about competing parties.



modeling of the chinese wall property
Modeling of the Chinese Wall Property
  • Given a COI = {A1, …, An}, if one can access Ai, then s/he should not be allowed to access the rest.
  • Suppose for Ai, the permission is Pi, then

⊔1≤i<j≤n ∃Pi.Ai⊓∃Pj.Aj⊑⊥

  • Separation of Duties…
    • Intuition
    • Definition
  • Semantic Details
    • MEP
    • MEO
    • FA
    • IFA
mutually exclusive positions
Mutually Exclusive Positions
  • A ‘position’ is an organizational role denoting a group of subjects such as employees, managers, CEOs, etc. Given a set of positions P = {P1, …, Pn}, where each Pi is a concept name:
    • To enforce that a subject can be assigned to at mostone position among P.
    • To enforce that no subject can be assigned to all the positions in P.
    • To enforce that a subject can be assigned to at most m positions among P.
exercise of mep
Exercise of MEP
  • In a bank scenario, customers sign checks; bank clerks cash out the checks and managers monitor the checks.
  • MEP: ‘one can play at most one of the positions as customer, clerk and manager.’
exercise of mep cont
Exercise of MEP cont.
  • MEP: ‘no one can play more all of the positions as customer, clerk and manager.’
  • MEP: ‘one can play at most 1 of the positions as customer, clerk and manager.’
mutually exclusive operations
Mutually Exclusive Operations
  • An `operation’ is a kind of permission that subjects may be allowed to perform some `act’ on objects, such as Read, Download, etc. Given a set of operations giving rise to a MEO, OP = {Op1, …, Opn} (where each Opi is a DL role name), then, we distinguish two different kinds of MEO:
    • To enforce that a subject cannot perform any two operations in OP.
    • To enforce that a subject cannot perform any two operations in OPon the same object.
exercise of meo
Exercise of MEO
  • Suppose a common file repository scenario: files are objects, users are clients that visit the repository and permissions are read or write.
  • MEO: ‘one cannot read and write at the same time.’
  • MEO: ‘one cannot read and write at the same time on the same file.’

Notice the difference between the two MEO’s.

functional access and inverse
Functional Access and Inverse
  • FA: A permission is functional iff it connects at most one object in the range.
    • If each user in U, has an FA, P, to an object in O, then
  • IFA: A permission is inverse functional iff it connects at most one subject in the domain.
    • If each object in O, has and IFA, P-, from a user in U, then
exercise of fa and ifa
Exercise of FA and IFA
  • Give a scenario where FA and IFA are necessary.
    • Desktop usage in lab.
    • Bank private manager/clerk service

  • OWL Lite: originally intended to support those users primarily needing a classification hierarchy and simple constraints.
  • OWL DL: to provide the maximum expressiveness possible while retaining computational completeness, decidability and the availability of practical reasoning algorithms.
  • OWL Full: designed to preserve some compatibility with RDF Schema.
exercise of owl
Exercise of OWL
  • Refer to document specification…