L ogics for D ata and K nowledge R epresentation

1 / 30

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

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.

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

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

### Logics for Data and KnowledgeRepresentation

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
• Build the theory of the mental model with the logic

<?xml version=“1.0”?>

<!DOCTYPE rdf:RDF[…

]>

<rdf:RDF…

>

<Owl:Ontology…>

</rdf:RDF>

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

YES!

• Subsumption?

Of course!

More than concept subsumption!

Arbitrary!

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

DL Modeling

Model the following NL sentences with DLs.

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

Child⊓≤1hasParent⊓≥1hasparent⊓∀hasSibling.⊥

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

Friend⊓∃like.(Movie⊓Foreign)⊓∀like.(Cartoon⊓Disney)

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

BTree≡Tree⊓≤2hasSubTree.BTree

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

Monkey⊓∃get.Banana⊑∃hasClimbedOnto.(Box⊓∃atPositionOf.Banana)

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:

and/or/some/only

¬(C⊓D)≡¬C⊔¬D

C

D

D

D

D

D

C

C

C

C

C

D

C

D

¬∀R.C≡∃R.¬C

(¬∀R.C)I

=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) )}

=(∃R.¬C)I

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

A

A,B

S

e

f

R

R

A

d

S

S

g

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?

∃Likes.(Blond⊓∃Neighbor.¬Blond)

∃Likes.(∃Neighbor.(∀Neighbor.¬Blond))

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?

OWA!

• 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.
• 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

¬∀R.A⊓∀R.C⊑T∀R.D

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

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

Policies

Properties

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).

Update

Update

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.

COI

COI

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⊑⊥

SoD
• Separation of Duties…
• Intuition
• Definition
• Semantic Details
• MEP
• MEO
• FA
• IFA
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
• 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.
• 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
• 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
• 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
• 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
• Give a scenario where FA and IFA are necessary.
• Desktop usage in lab.
• Bank private manager/clerk service

OWL
• 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
• Refer to document specification…