Category:LogicalOP

From Odp

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 19: Line 19:
and a designer needs to represent a relation between more than two elements,
and a designer needs to represent a relation between more than two elements,
a Logical OP is needed in order to express an n-ary relation semantics by
a Logical OP is needed in order to express an n-ary relation semantics by
-
only using class and binary relation primitives.
+
only using class and binary relation primitives. They can be of two types: logical macros, and transformation patterns.
-
They can be of two types: logical macros, and transformation patterns
+
Logical macros provide a "shortcut" to model a recurrent intuitive logical expression. Example: the macro ∇R.C colloquially means “every R must be a C” and
 +
formally ∃R.⊤ ⨅ ∀R.C which in OWL would be expressed as the combination of an owl:allValuesFrom restriction with an owl:someValuesFrom restriction.

Revision as of 10:22, 9 June 2009


Logical Ontology Design Patterns (Logical OPs)
A Logical OP is a formal expression, whose only parts are expressions from a logical vocabulary, e.g. OWL DL, that solves a problem of expressivity.



Description

Logical OPs are only expressed in terms of a logical vocabulary, because their signature (the set of predicate names, e.g. the set of classes and properties in an OWL ontology) is empty (with minor exceptions, e.g. the default inclusion of owl:Thing in OWL). On one hand, Logical OPs are independent from a specific domain of interest (i.e. they are content-independent), on the other hand, they depend on the expressivity of the logical formalism that is used for representation. In other words, Logical OPs help to solve design problems where the primitives of the representation language do not directly support certain logical constructs. For example, if the representation language is OWL, and a designer needs to represent a relation between more than two elements, a Logical OP is needed in order to express an n-ary relation semantics by only using class and binary relation primitives. They can be of two types: logical macros, and transformation patterns.

Logical macros provide a "shortcut" to model a recurrent intuitive logical expression. Example: the macro ∇R.C colloquially means “every R must be a C” and formally ∃R.⊤ ⨅ ∀R.C which in OWL would be expressed as the combination of an owl:allValuesFrom restriction with an owl:someValuesFrom restriction.

Subcategories

This category has the following 2 subcategories, out of 2 total.

C

P

Personal tools
Quality Committee
Content OP publishers