scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

Artificial Intelligence Applications Institute

About: Artificial Intelligence Applications Institute is a based out in . It is known for research contribution in the topics: Ontology (information science) & Enterprise modelling. The organization has 48 authors who have published 61 publications receiving 7041 citations.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper outlines a methodology for developing and evaluating ontologies, first discussing informal techniques, concerning such issues as scoping, handling ambiguity, reaching agreement and producing definitions, and considers, a more formal approach.
Abstract: This paper is intended to serve as a comprehensive introduction to the emerging field concerned with the design and use of ontologies. We observe that disparate backgrounds, languages, tools and techniques are a major barrier to effective communication among people, organisations and/or software understanding (i.e. an “ontology”) in a given subject area, can improve such communication, which in turn, can give rise to greater reuse and sharing, inter-operability, and more reliable software. After motivating their need, we clarify just what ontologies are and what purpose they serve. We outline a methodology for developing and evaluating ontologies, first discussing informal techniques, concerning such issues as scoping, handling ambiguity, reaching agreement and producing definitions. We then consider the benefits and describe, a more formal approach. We re-visit the scoping phase, and discuss the role of formal languages and techniques in the specification, implementation and evalution of ontologies. Finally, we review the state of the art and practice in this emerging field, considering various case studies, software tools for ontology development, key research issues and future prospects.

3,568 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The Enterprise Ontology was developed within the Enterprise Project, a collaborative effort to provide a framework for enterprise modelling, and was built to serve as a basis for this framework which includes methods and a computer tool set for enterprise modeling.
Abstract: This is a comprehensive description of the Enterprise Ontology, a collection of terms and definitions relevant to business enterprises. We state its intended purposes, describe how we went about building it, define all the terms and describe our experiences in converting these into formal definitions. We then describe how we used the Enterprise Ontology and give an evaluation which compares the actual uses with original purposes. We conclude by summarising what we have learned. The Enterprise Ontology was developed within the Enterprise Project, a collaborative effort to provide a framework for enterprise modelling. The ontology was built to serve as a basis for this framework which includes methods and a computer tool set for enterprise modelling. We give an overview of the Enterprise Project, elaborate on the intended use of the ontology, and give a brief overview of the process we went through to build it. The scope of the Enterprise Ontology covers those core concepts required for the project, which will appeal to a wider audience. We present natural language definitions for all the terms, starting with the foundational concepts (e.g. entity, relationship, actor). These are used to define the main body of terms, which are divided into the following subject areas: activities, organisation, strategy and marketing. We review some of the things learned during the formalisation process of converting the natural language definitions into Ontolingua. We identify and propose solutions for what may be general problems occurring in the development of a wide range of ontologies in other domains. We then characterise in general terms the sorts of issues that will be faced when converting an informal ontology into a formal one. Finally, we describe our experiences in using the Enterprise Ontology. We compare these with the intended uses, noting our successes and failures. We conclude with an overall evaluation and summary of what we have learned.

1,070 citations

Book ChapterDOI
07 Nov 2004
TL;DR: The experience in applying KAoS services to ensure policy compliance for Semantic Web Services workflow composition and enactment is described and how this work has uncovered requirements for increasing the expressivity of policy beyond what can be done with description logic is described.
Abstract: In this paper we describe our experience in applying KAoS services to ensure policy compliance for Semantic Web Services workflow composition and enactment. We are developing these capabilities within the context of two applications: Coalition Search and Rescue (CoSAR-TS) and Semantic Firewall (SFW). We describe how this work has uncovered requirements for increasing the expressivity of policy beyond what can be done with description logic (e.g., role-value-maps), and how we are extending our representation and reasoning mechanisms in a carefully controlled manner to that end. Since KAoS employs OWL for policy representation, it fits naturally with the use of OWL-S workflow descriptions generated by the AIAI I-X planning system in the CoSAR-TS application. The advanced reasoning mechanisms of KAoS are based on the JTP inference engine and enable the analysis of classes and instances of processes from a policy perspective. As the result of analysis, KAoS concludes whether a particular workflow step is allowed by policy and whether the performance of this step would incur additional policy-generated obligations. Issues in the representation of processes within OWL-S are described. Besides what is done during workflow composition, aspects of policy compliance can be checked at runtime when a workflow is enacted. We illustrate these capabilities through two application examples. Finally, we outline plans for future work.

636 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The search control heuristics employed within the O-Plan planner involve the use of condition typing, time and resource constraints and domain constraints to allow knowledge about an application domain to be used to prune the search for a solution.

497 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper introduces and defines the concept of a knowledge level model, comparing how the term is used today with Newell's original usage, and distinguishes two major types of knowledge level models: ontologies and problem solving models.
Abstract: We address the problem of highly varied and inconsistent usage of terms by the knowledge technology community in the area of knowledge-level modelling. It is arguably difficult or impossible for any standard set of terms and definitions to be agreed on. However, de facto standard usage is already emerging within and across certain segments of the community. This is very difficult to see, however, especially for newcomers to the field. It is the goal of this paper to identify and reflect the most common usage of terms as currently found in the literature. To this end, we introduce and define the concept of a knowledge level model, comparing how the term is used today with Newell's original usage. We distinguish two major types of knowledge level model: ontologies and problem solving models. We describe what an ontology is, what they may be used for and how they are represented. We distinguish various kinds of ontologies and define a number of additional related concepts. We describe what is meant by a problem solving model, what they are used for, and attempt to clarify some terminological confusion that exists in the literature. We define what is meant by the term ‘problem’, and some common notions used to characterise and represent problems. We introduce and describe the ideas of tasks, problem solving methods and a variety of other important related concepts.

224 citations


Authors

Showing all 48 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Austin Tate331785307
Emma Hart281873968
Michael Rovatsos241222835
Paul W. H. Chung231761936
John Levine22812046
Mark Drummond16371228
John Kingston1545629
Stuart Aitken1440989
Michael Uschold14246111
Stephen Potter1463642
Yun-Heh Chen-Burger14551190
Jeff Dalton14381419
Clauirton Siebra1188453
Gerhard Wickler1042356
Richard Wheeler922502
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
Nokia
28.3K papers, 695.7K citations

78% related

PARC
7.2K papers, 498.6K citations

77% related

Tampere University of Technology
19.7K papers, 431.7K citations

76% related

Télécom ParisTech
7.7K papers, 191.4K citations

75% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
20171
20141
20122
20111
20101
20091