This Article 
   
 Share 
   
 Bibliographic References 
   
 Add to: 
 
Digg
Furl
Spurl
Blink
Simpy
Google
Del.icio.us
Y!MyWeb
 
 Search 
   
Combining Multiple Knowledge Bases
June 1991 (vol. 3 no. 2)
pp. 208-220

Combining knowledge present in multiple knowledge base systems into a single knowledge base is discussed. A knowledge based system can be considered an extension of a deductive database in that it permits function symbols as part of the theory. Alternative knowledge bases that deal with the same subject matter are considered. The authors define the concept of combining knowledge present in a set of knowledge bases and present algorithms to maximally combine them so that the combination is consistent with respect to the integrity constraints associated with the knowledge bases. For this, the authors define the concept of maximality and prove that the algorithms presented combine the knowledge bases to generate a maximal theory. The authors also discuss the relationships between combining multiple knowledge bases and the view update problem.

[1] K. Apt, H. Blair, and A. Walker, "Towards a Theory of Declarative Knowledge,"Proc. Workshop Foundations Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, Washington D.C., 1988, pp. 546-629.
[2] K. R. Apt and M. H. van Emden, "Contributions to the theory of logic programming,"JACM, vol. 29, pp. 841-862, 1982.
[3] C. Baral, J. Lobo, and J. Minker, "Generalized well-founded semantics for logic programs," Tech. Rep. CS-TR-2330, Dep. Comput. Sci., Univ. of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, 1989. A shorter version appears inProc. CADE'90.
[4] U. S. Chakravarthy, J. Grant, and J. Minker, "Foundations of semantic query optimization for deductive databases," inProc. Int. Workshop Foundations Deductive Databases Logic Programming, J. Minker, Ed., Aug. 1986.
[5] K. L. Clark, "Negation as failure," inLogic and Data Bases, H. Gallaire and J. Minker, Eds. New York: Plenum, 1978, pp. 293-322.
[6] R. Fagin, G. Kuper, J. Ullman, and M. Vardi, "Updating logical databases," inAdvances in Computing Research, Vol. 3, 1986, pp. 1-18.
[7] R. Fagin, J. D. Ullman, and M. Vardi, "On the semantics of updates in databases," inProc. ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD Symp. Principles Database Syst., Atlanta, GA, 1983, pp. 352-365.
[8] M. Fitting, "A Kripke-Kleene, Semantics for logic programs,"J. Logic Programming, vol. 3, pp. 93-114, 1986.
[9] M. Fitting and M. Ben-Jacob, "Stratified and three-valued logic programming semantics," inProc. 5th Int. Conf. Symp. Logic Programming, R. A. Kowalski and K. A. Bowen, Eds., Seattle, WA, Aug. 15-19, 1988, pp. 1054-1069.
[10] M. Gelfond and V. Lifschitz, "The stable model semantics for logic programming, " inProc. 5th Int. Conf. Symp. Logic Programming, R. A. Kowalski and K. A. Bowen, Eds., Seattle, WA, Aug. 15-19, 1988, pp. 1070-1080.
[11] R. Kowalski and F. Sadri, "Knowledge representation without integrity constraints, draft manuscript, Dec. 1988.
[12] R. Kowalski, "An application of general purpose theorem proving to database integrity, " inProc. Workshop Foundations Deductive Databases Logic Programming, J. Minker, Ed., Washington, DC, Aug. 18-22, 1986, pp. 477-517.
[13] J.W. Lloyd,Foundations of Logic Programming, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1987.
[14] J. W. Lloyd and R. W. Topor, "Making Prolog more expressive,"J. Logic Programming, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 225-240, Oct. 1984.
[15] J. Minker, "On indefinite databases and the closed world assumption," inLecture Notes in Computer Science, no. 138, pp. 292-308, Springer-Verlag, 1982.
[16] J. Minker and J. Grant, "Integrity constraints in knowledge based systems," inKnowledge Engineering, Vol. II, Applications, H. Adeli, Ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1990, pp. 1-25. Also CS-TR-2223 of Univ. of Maryland, College Park.
[17] J. Minker and D. Perlis, "Computing protected circumscription,"J. Logic Programming, vol 2, no. 4, pp. 235-249, Dec. 1985.
[18] J. Minker, "Applications of protected circumscription" inLecture Notes on Computer Science, Vol. 170, 7th Conf. Automat. Deduction, May 1984, pp. 414-425.
[19] J. Minker, "Protected circumscription," inProc. Workshop Non-Monotonic Reasoning, Oct. 17-19, 1984, pp. 337-343.
[20] J. Minker and A. Rajasekar, "Procedural interpretation of non-Horn logic programs," inProc. 9th Int Conf. Automat. Deduction, E. Lusk and R. Overbeek, Eds., Argonne, IL, May 23-26, 1988, pp. 278-293.
[21] T. Przymusinski, "On the semantics of stratified deductive databases and logic programs," inFoundations of Deductive Databases and Logic Programming, J. Minker, Ed. Los Altos, CA: Morgan-Kaufman, 1987.
[22] T. Przymusinski, "Every logic program has a natural stratification and an iterated least fixed point model," in8th ACM Symp. Principles Database Syst. (PODS), Mar. 1989, pp. 11-21.
[23] T. C. Przymusinski, "Perfect model semantics," inProc. 5th Int. Conf. and Symp. Logic Programming, R. A. Kowalski and K. A. Bowen, Eds., Seattle, WA, Aug. 15-19, 1988, pp. 1081-1096.
[24] F. Rossi and S. Naqvi, "Contributions to the view update problem," inProc. Int. Conf. Logic Programming Lisbon, 1989, pp. 398-415.
[25] M. H. van Emden and R. A. Kowalski, "The semantics of predicate logic as a programming language,"J. ACM, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 733- 743, 1976.
[26] A. Van Gelder, A. Ross, and J. S. Schlipf, "The well-founded semantics for general logic programs," in7th ACM Symp. Principles Database Syst. (PODS), Mar. 1988, pp. 221-230.

Index Terms:
multiple knowledge base systems; single knowledge base; knowledge based system; deductive database; function symbols; integrity constraints; maximality; maximal theory; view update problem; data integrity; database theory; deductive databases; knowledge based systems
Citation:
C. Baral, S. Kraus, J. Minker, "Combining Multiple Knowledge Bases," IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 208-220, June 1991, doi:10.1109/69.88001
Usage of this product signifies your acceptance of the Terms of Use.