scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Peter F. Patel-Schneider

Bio: Peter F. Patel-Schneider is an academic researcher from Bell Labs. The author has contributed to research in topics: Description logic & Semantic Web. The author has an hindex of 49, co-authored 128 publications receiving 21312 citations. Previous affiliations of Peter F. Patel-Schneider include Nuance Communications & Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc..


Papers
More filters
BookDOI
01 Jan 2003
TL;DR: The Description Logic Handbook as mentioned in this paper provides a thorough account of the subject, covering all aspects of research in this field, namely: theory, implementation, and applications, and can also be used for self-study or as a reference for knowledge representation and artificial intelligence courses.
Abstract: Description logics are embodied in several knowledge-based systems and are used to develop various real-life applications. Now in paperback, The Description Logic Handbook provides a thorough account of the subject, covering all aspects of research in this field, namely: theory, implementation, and applications. Its appeal will be broad, ranging from more theoretically oriented readers, to those with more practically oriented interests who need a sound and modern understanding of knowledge representation systems based on description logics. As well as general revision throughout the book, this new edition presents a new chapter on ontology languages for the semantic web, an area of great importance for the future development of the web. In sum, the book will serve as a unique resource for the subject, and can also be used for self-study or as a reference for knowledge representation and artificial intelligence courses.

5,644 citations

01 Jan 2004
TL;DR: This document contains a structured informal description of the full set of {owL} language constructs and is meant to serve as a reference for {OWL} users who want to construct {OWl} ontologies.
Abstract: The {W}eb {O}ntology {L}anguage {OWL} is a semantic markup language for publishing and sharing ontologies on the {W}orld {W}ide {W}eb. {OWL} is developed as a vocabulary extension of {RDF} (the {R}esource {D}escription {F}ramework) and is derived from the {DAML}+{OIL} {W}eb {O}ntology {L}anguage. {T}his document contains a structured informal description of the full set of {OWL} language constructs and is meant to serve as a reference for {OWL} users who want to construct {OWL} ontologies.

2,508 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper discusses how the philosophy and features of OWL can be traced back to these older formalisms, with modifications driven by several other constraints on OWL.

1,630 citations

01 Jan 2008
TL;DR: The OWL 2 Web Ontology Language, informally OWL2, is an ontology language for the Semantic Web with formally defined meaning.
Abstract: The OWL 2 Web Ontology Language, informally OWL 2, is an ontology language for the Semantic Web with formally defined meaning. OWL 2 ontologies provide classes, properties, individuals, and data values and are stored as Semantic Web documents. OWL 2 ontologies can be used along with information written in RDF, and OWL 2 ontologies themselves are primarily exchanged as RDF documents. The OWL 2 Document Overview describes the overall state of OWL 2, and should be read before other OWL 2 documents. The meaningful constructs provided by OWL 2 are defined in terms of their structure. As well, a functional-style syntax is defined for these constructs, with examples and informal descriptions. One can reason with OWL 2 ontologies under either the RDF-Based Semantics [OWL 2 RDF-Based Semantics] or the Direct Semantics [OWL 2 Direct Semantics]. If certain restrictions on OWL 2 ontologies are satisfied and the ontology is in OWL 2 DL, reasoning under the Direct Semantics can be implemented using techniques well known in the literature.

957 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is shown that many aspects of OWL have been thoroughly reengineered in OWL 2, thus producing a robust platform for future development of the language.

897 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper describes a mechanism for defining ontologies that are portable over representation systems, basing Ontolingua itself on an ontology of domain-independent, representational idioms.

12,962 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Apr 1988-Nature
TL;DR: In this paper, a sedimentological core and petrographic characterisation of samples from eleven boreholes from the Lower Carboniferous of Bowland Basin (Northwest England) is presented.
Abstract: Deposits of clastic carbonate-dominated (calciclastic) sedimentary slope systems in the rock record have been identified mostly as linearly-consistent carbonate apron deposits, even though most ancient clastic carbonate slope deposits fit the submarine fan systems better. Calciclastic submarine fans are consequently rarely described and are poorly understood. Subsequently, very little is known especially in mud-dominated calciclastic submarine fan systems. Presented in this study are a sedimentological core and petrographic characterisation of samples from eleven boreholes from the Lower Carboniferous of Bowland Basin (Northwest England) that reveals a >250 m thick calciturbidite complex deposited in a calciclastic submarine fan setting. Seven facies are recognised from core and thin section characterisation and are grouped into three carbonate turbidite sequences. They include: 1) Calciturbidites, comprising mostly of highto low-density, wavy-laminated bioclast-rich facies; 2) low-density densite mudstones which are characterised by planar laminated and unlaminated muddominated facies; and 3) Calcidebrites which are muddy or hyper-concentrated debrisflow deposits occurring as poorly-sorted, chaotic, mud-supported floatstones. These

9,929 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The role of ontology in supporting knowledge sharing activities is described, and a set of criteria to guide the development of ontologies for these purposes are presented, and it is shown how these criteria are applied in case studies from the design ofOntologies for engineering mathematics and bibliographic data.
Abstract: Recent work in Artificial Intelligence is exploring the use of formal ontologies as a way of specifying content-specific agreements for the sharing and reuse of knowledge among software entities. We take an engineering perspective on the development of such ontologies. Formal ontologies are viewed as designed artifacts, formulated for specific purposes and evaluated against objective design criteria. We describe the role of ontologies in supporting knowledge sharing activities, and then present a set of criteria to guide the development of ontologies for these purposes. We show how these criteria are applied in case studies from the design of ontologies for engineering mathematics and bibliographic data. Selected design decisions are discussed, and alternative representation choices and evaluated against the design criteria.

6,949 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Agent theory is concerned with the question of what an agent is, and the use of mathematical formalisms for representing and reasoning about the properties of agents as discussed by the authors ; agent architectures can be thought of as software engineering models of agents; and agent languages are software systems for programming and experimenting with agents.
Abstract: The concept of an agent has become important in both Artificial Intelligence (AI) and mainstream computer science. Our aim in this paper is to point the reader at what we perceive to be the most important theoretical and practical issues associated with the design and construction of intelligent agents. For convenience, we divide these issues into three areas (though as the reader will see, the divisions are at times somewhat arbitrary). Agent theory is concerned with the question of what an agent is, and the use of mathematical formalisms for representing and reasoning about the properties of agents. Agent architectures can be thought of as software engineering models of agents;researchers in this area are primarily concerned with the problem of designing software or hardware systems that will satisfy the properties specified by agent theorists. Finally, agent languages are software systems for programming and experimenting with agents; these languages may embody principles proposed by theorists. The paper is not intended to serve as a tutorial introduction to all the issues mentioned; we hope instead simply to identify the most important issues, and point to work that elaborates on them. The article includes a short review of current and potential applications of agent technology.

6,714 citations

01 Jan 2002
TL;DR: An ontology defines a common vocabulary for researchers who need to share information in a domain that includes machine-interpretable definitions of basic concepts in the domain and relations among them.
Abstract: 1 Why develop an ontology? In recent years the development of ontologies—explicit formal specifications of the terms in the domain and relations among them (Gruber 1993)—has been moving from the realm of ArtificialIntelligence laboratories to the desktops of domain experts. Ontologies have become common on the World-Wide Web. The ontologies on the Web range from large taxonomies categorizing Web sites (such as on Yahoo!) to categorizations of products for sale and their features (such as on Amazon.com). The WWW Consortium (W3C) is developing the Resource Description Framework (Brickley and Guha 1999), a language for encoding knowledge on Web pages to make it understandable to electronic agents searching for information. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), in conjunction with the W3C, is developing DARPA Agent Markup Language (DAML) by extending RDF with more expressive constructs aimed at facilitating agent interaction on the Web (Hendler and McGuinness 2000). Many disciplines now develop standardized ontologies that domain experts can use to share and annotate information in their fields. Medicine, for example, has produced large, standardized, structured vocabularies such as SNOMED (Price and Spackman 2000) and the semantic network of the Unified Medical Language System (Humphreys and Lindberg 1993). Broad general-purpose ontologies are emerging as well. For example, the United Nations Development Program and Dun & Bradstreet combined their efforts to develop the UNSPSC ontology which provides terminology for products and services (www.unspsc.org). An ontology defines a common vocabulary for researchers who need to share information in a domain. It includes machine-interpretable definitions of basic concepts in the domain and relations among them. Why would someone want to develop an ontology? Some of the reasons are:

4,838 citations