A framework for handling inconsistency in changing ontologies

142Citations
Citations of this article
89Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

One of the major problems of large scale, distributed and evolving ontologies is the potential introduction of inconsistencies. In this paper we survey four different approaches to handling inconsistency in DL-based ontologies: consistent ontology evolution, repairing inconsistencies, reasoning in the presence of inconsistencies and multi-version reasoning. We present a common formal basis for all of them, and use this common basis to compare these approaches. We discuss the different requirements for each of these methods, the conditions under which each of them is applicable, the knowledge requirements of the various methods, and the different usage scenarios to which they would apply. © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005.

References Powered by Scopus

A theory of diagnosis from first principles

2357Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The PROMPT suite: Interactive tools for ontology merging and mapping

547Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Reducing OWL entailment to description logic satisfiability

183Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Ontology change: Classification and survey

232Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Inconsistency-tolerant semantics for description logics

198Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Ontology population and enrichment: State of the art

148Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Haase, P., Van Harmelen, F., Huang, Z., Stuckenschmidt, H., & Sure, Y. (2005). A framework for handling inconsistency in changing ontologies. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) (Vol. 3729 LNCS, pp. 353–367). https://doi.org/10.1007/11574620_27

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 52

70%

Researcher 11

15%

Professor / Associate Prof. 9

12%

Lecturer / Post doc 2

3%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Computer Science 73

95%

Engineering 2

3%

Social Sciences 1

1%

Earth and Planetary Sciences 1

1%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free