Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Process Interference Case-Study
Dependency Scopes
Semantically-Governed Data-Aware Processes
Conclusions
Conclusions and Related Work
Conclusion
Acknowledgement
Introduction
Background: Model Expansion Task
Related Work
Conclusion and Future Work
References
All Topics
Computer Science
Database Systems

Semantically-Governed Data-Aware Processes

Profile image of Diego CalvaneseDiego Calvanese

2012, Knowledge-intensive Business Processes

Abstract

Abstract. In this paper we consider processes that run over data stored in a relational database. Our setting is that of ontology-based data access (OBDA), where the information in the database is conceptually represented as an ontology and is declaratively mapped to it through queries. We are interested in verifying temporal logic formulas on the evolution of the information at the conceptual level, taking into account the knowledge present in the ontology, which allows for deducing information that is only implicitly available. ...

Related papers

Modeling and Reasoning over Declarative Data-Aware Processes with Object-Centric Behavioral Constraints
Marco Montali

2019

Existing process modeling notations ranging from Petri nets to BPMN have difficulties capturing the data manipulated by processes. Process models often focus on the control flow, lacking an explicit, conceptually well-founded integration with real data models, such as ER diagrams or UML class diagrams. To overcome this limitation, Object-Centric Behavioral Constraints (OCBC) models were recently proposed as a new notation that combines full-fledged data models with control-flow constraints inspired by declarative process modeling notations such as DECLARE and DCR Graphs. We propose a formalization of the OCBC model using temporal description logics. The obtained formalization allows us to lift all reasoning services defined for constraint-based process modeling notations without data, to the much more sophisticated scenario of OCBC. Furthermore, we show how reasoning over OCBC models can be reformulated into decidable, standard reasoning tasks over the corresponding temporal descrip...

View PDFchevron_right
ON TEMPORAL DEDUCTIVE DATABASES
Mehmet Orgun

Computational Intelligence, 1996

This paper introduces a temporal deductive database system featuring a logic programming language and an algebraic front-end. The language, called Temporal Datalog, is an extension of Datalog based on a simple temporal logic with two temporal operators, namely first and next. Programs of Temporal Datalog are considered as temporal deductive databases, specifying temporal relationships among data and providing base relations to Tra expressions. The minimum model of a given Temporal Datalog program is regarded as the temporal database the program models intensionally. The algebraic front-end, called Tra, is a point-wise extension of the relational algebra upon the set of natural numbers. When needed during the evaluation of Tra expressions, slices of temporal relations over intervals can be retrieved from a given temporal deductive database by bottom-up evaluation strategies.

View PDFchevron_right
Querying Business Processes and Ontologies in a Logic Programming Environment
Michele Missikoff
View PDFchevron_right
Temporal Enrichment and Querying of Ontology-Compliant Data
Phokion Kolaitis

Communications in Computer and Information Science, 2020

We consider the problem of answering temporal queries on RDF stores, in presence of time-agnostic RDFS domain ontologies, of relational data sources that include temporal information, and of rules that map the domain information in the source schemas into the target ontology. Our proposed solution consists of two rule-based domainindependent algorithms. The first algorithm materializes target RDF data via a version of data exchange that enriches both the data and the ontology with temporal information from the relational sources. The second algorithm accepts as inputs temporal queries expressed in terms of the domain ontology, using SPARQL supplemented with a lightweight easy-to-use formalism for time annotations and comparisons. The algorithm translates the queries into the standard SPARQL form that respects the structure of the temporal RDF information while preserving the semantics of the questions, thus ensuring successful evaluation of the queries on the materialized temporally-enriched RDF data. In this paper we present the algorithms, report on their implementation and experimental results for two application domains, and discuss future work.

View PDFchevron_right
Temporal semantic assumptions and their use in databases
xxx Sean

IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 1998

Data explicitly stored in a temporal database are often associated with certain semantic assumptions. Each assumption can be viewed as a way of deriving implicit information from explicitly stored data. Rather than leaving the task of deriving (possibly infinite) implicit data to application programs, as is the case currently, it is desirable that this be handled by the database management system. To achieve this, this paper formalizes and studies two types of semantic assumptions: point-based and interval-based. The point-based assumptions include those assumptions that use interpolation methods over values at different time instants, while the interval-based assumptions include those that involve the conversion of values across different time granularities. The paper presents techniques on: 1) how assumptions on specific sets of attributes can be automatically derived from the specification of interpolation and conversion functions, and 2) given the representation of assumptions, how a user query can be converted into a system query such that the answer of this system query over the explicit data is the same as that of the user query over the explicit and the implicit data. To precisely illustrate concepts and algorithms, the paper uses a logic-based abstract query language. The paper also shows how the same concepts can be applied to concrete temporal query languages.

View PDFchevron_right
Reasoning with Data-Centric Business Processes
Peter Baumgartner

2012

We describe an approach to modelling and reasoning about data-centric business processes and present a form of general model checking. Our technique extends existing approaches, which explore systems only from concrete initial states. Specifically, we model business processes in terms of smaller fragments, whose possible interactions are constrained by first-order logic formulae. In turn, process fragments are connected graphs annotated with instructions to modify data. Correctness properties concerning the evolution of data with respect to processes can be stated in a first-order branching-time logic over built-in theories, such as linear integer arithmetic, records and arrays. Solving general model checking problems over this logic is considerably harder than model checking when a concrete initial state is given. To this end, we present a tableau procedure that reduces these model checking problems to first-order logic over arithmetic. The resulting proof obligations are passed on to appropriate "off-the-shelf" theorem provers. We also detail our modelling approach, describe the reasoning components and report on first experiments.

View PDFchevron_right
A conceptual modelling formalism for temporal database applications
Peri Loucopoulos

Information Systems, 1991

Arguably the most critical of all activities in the development of an information system is that of requirements modelling. The effectiveness of such a specification depends largely on the ability of the chosen conceptual model to represent the problem domain in such a way so as to permit natural and rigorous descriptions within a methodological framework. Recent years have witnessed an increased demand for information systems which cover a wide spectrum of application domains. This, inevitably, has had the effect of demanding conceptual models of enhanced functionality and expressive power than is currently possible in practice. This paper introduces the TEMPORA modelling paradigm for developing information system applications from a unified perspective which deals with definitional, intentional and constrain knowledge. The paper discusses in detail one of the components of the TEMPORA conceptual model, the entity-relationshiptime (ERT) model, which deals with structural aspects including time and complex objects modelling.

View PDFchevron_right
Answering Continuous Description Logic Queries: Managing Static and Volatile Knowledge in Ontologies
Carlos Bobed

International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems, 2014

During the last years, mobile computing has been the focus of many research efforts, due mainly to the ever-growing use of mobile devices. In this context, there is a need to manage dynamic data, such as location data or other data provided by sensors. As an example, the continuous processing of location-dependent queries has been the subject of thorough research. However, there is still a need of highly expressive ways of formulating queries, augmenting in this way the systems’ answer capabilities. Regarding this issue, the modeling power of Description Logics (DLs) and the inferring capabilities of their attached reasoners could fulfill this new requirement. The main problem is that DLs are inherently oriented to model static knowledge, that is, to capture the nature of the modeled objects, but not to handle changes in the property values (which requires a full ontology reclassification), as is common in mobile computing environments (e.g., the location is expected to vary continually). In this paper, we present a novel approach to process continuous queries that combines 1) the DL reasoning capabilities to deal with static knowledge, with 2) the efficient data access provided by a relational database to deal with volatile knowledge. By marking at modeling time the properties that are expected to change during the lifetime of the queries, our system is able to exploit both the results of the classification process provided by a DL reasoner, and the low computational costs of a database when accessing changing data (mobile environments, semantic sensors, etc.), following a two-step continuous query processing that enables us to handle continuous DL queries efficiently. Experimental results show the feasibility of our approach.

View PDFchevron_right
Ontologies and databases: The DL-Lite approach
Mariano Rodriguez-Muro

… for Information Systems, 2009

View PDFchevron_right
Introduction to the TPLP special issue, logic programming in databases: From Datalog to semantic-web rules
Letizia Tanca

Theory and Practice of Logic Programming, 2010

Much has happened in data and knowledge base research since the introduction of the relational model in Codd (1970) and its strong logical foundations influence its advances ever since. Logic has been a common ground where Database and Artificial Intelligence research competed and collaborated with each other for a long time (Abiteboul et al. 1995). The product of this joint effort has been a set of logic-based formalisms, such as the Relational Calculus (Codd 1970), Datalog (Ceri et al. 1990), Description Logics (Baader et al. 2007), etc., capturing not only the structure but also the semantics of data in an explicit way, thus enabling complex inference procedures.

View PDFchevron_right

References (183)

  1. Kamal Bhattacharya, Nathan S. Caswell, Santhosh Kumaran, Anil Nigam, and Frederick Y. Wu. Artifact-centered operational modeling: Lessons from customer engagements. IBM Sys- tems Journal, 46(4):703-721, 2007.
  2. David Cohn and Richard Hull. Business artifacts: A data-centric approach to modeling busi- ness operations and processes. IEEE Data Eng. Bull., 32(3):3-9, 2009.
  3. Marlon Dumas. On the convergence of data and process engineering. In Proc. of the 15th In- ternational Conference on Advances in Databases and Information Systems (ADBIS), Vienna, Austria, pages 19-26. Springer, September 2011.
  4. Thomas Erl. Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA): Concepts, Technology, and Design. Pren- tice Hall, 2005.
  5. P. Feldman and D. Miller. Entity model clustering: Structuring a data model by abstraction. The Computer Journal, 29(4):348360, 1986.
  6. Richard Hull, Elio Damaggio, Riccardo De Masellis, Fabiana Fournier, Manmohan Gupta, Fenno Terry Heath, Stacy Hobson, Mark H. Linehan, Sridhar Maradugu, Anil Nigam, Piyawadee Noi Sukaviriya, and Roman Vaculín. Business artifacts with guard-stage-milestone lifecycles: managing artifact interactions with conditions and events. In Proceedings of the Fifth ACM International Conference on Distributed Event-Based Systems (DEBS), New York, NY, USA, pages 51-62. ACM, July 2011.
  7. Thomas Kohlborn, Axel Korthaus, Taizan Chan, and Michael Rosemann. Identification and analysis of business and software services -a consolidated approach. IEEE Transactions on Services Computing, 2(1):50-64, 2009.
  8. Vera Künzle and Manfred Reichert. Philharmonicflows: towards a framework for object-aware process management. Journal of Software Maintenance, 23(4):205-244, 2011.
  9. Guy Redding, Marlon Dumas, Arthur H. M. ter Hofstede, and Adrian Iordachescu. A flexible, object-centric approach for business process modelling. Service Oriented Computing and Applications, 4(3):191-201, 2010. 15: function getDependentElems(vv , BP ): List[Element] 16: varList = {vv } 17: DE = ∅ 18: for each ai ∈ BP .getActivities do 19: for each ipi := v ∈ ai .parseInputAssignments do 20: if v ∈ varList then 21: for each opi ∈ out(ai ) do 22: varList.add (opi )
  10. DE .add(ai); break; 24: for each SW IT CHi ∈ BP .getSWITCHelements do 25: ci = SWITCHi .getFirstCondition 26: if ci .getLeftVariable ∈ varList then 27: miDE.add(SW IT CHi); 28: return DE 29: function getTempCS(ei , ej , BP ): List[Elem] 30: tmpCSList = ∅ 31: path = getPathBtw(ei , ej , BP ) 32: currCS = ∅ 33: for each item ∈ path do 34: match type(item) 35: case Element: 36: currCS .attachInSeq(item) 37: case BranchElMarker: 38: tmpCSList.add(currCS ) 39: currCS = ∅ 40: return tmpCSList References
  11. Xiao, Y., Urban, S.: Process dependencies and process interference rules for ana- lyzing the impact of failure in a service composition environment. In: Business Inf. Systems. Volume 4439 of LNCS. (2007) 67-81
  12. van Beest, N.R.T.P., Bulanov, P., Wortmann, J., Lazovik, A.: Resolving business process interference via dynamic reconfiguration. In: Proc. of 8th Int. Conf. on Service Oriented Computing (ICSOC). (2010) 47-60
  13. van Beest, N.R.T.P., Szirbik, N.B., Wortmann, J.C.: Assessing the interference in concurrent business processes. In: Proc. of 12th Int. Conf. on Enterprise Informa- tion Systems (ICEIS). (2010) 261-270
  14. Trčka, N., van der Aalst, W., Sidorova, N.: Data-flow anti-patterns: Discovering data-flow errors in workflows. In: Adv. Inf. Systems Eng. Volume 5565 of LNCS. (2009) 425-439
  15. Xiao, Y., Urban, S.: Using data dependencies to support the recovery of concurrent processes in a service composition environment. In: Proc. of the 16th Int. Conf. on Cooperative Inf. Systems. (2008) 139-156
  16. Urban, S., Gao, L., Shrestha, R., Courter, A.: The dynamics of process modeling: New directions for the use of events and rules in service-oriented computing. In: The Evolution of Conceptual Modeling. Volume 6520 of LNCS. (2011) 205-224
  17. van Beest, N.R.T.P., Kaldeli, E., Bulanov, P., Wortmann, J., Lazovik, A.: Auto- mated runtime repair of business processes. Technical Report 2012-12-2, University of Groningen (2012) www.cs.rug.nl/∼eirini/papers/tech 2012-12-2.pdf.
  18. Ouvans, C., Dumas, M., ter Hofstede, A., van der Aalst, W.: From BPMN process models to BPEL web services. In: Int. Conf. on Web Services. (2006) 285-292
  19. Kopp, O., Martin, D., Wutke, D., Leymann, F.: On the choice between graph- based and block-structured business process modeling languages. In: Modellierung betrieblicher Informationssysteme (MobIS 2008). Volume 141 of Lecture Notes in Informatics (LNI)., Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI) (2008) 59-72
  20. Rozsnyai, S., Vecera, R., Schiefer, J., Schatten, A.: Event cloud -searching for correlated business events. In: 9th IEEE Int. Conf. on E-Commerce Technology / 4th IEEE Int. Conf. on Enterprise Computing, E-Commerce and E-Services. (2007)
  21. Juhnke, E., Dornemann, T., Freisleben, B.: Fault-tolerant BPEL workflow exe- cution via cloud-aware recovery policies. In: 35th EUROMICRO Conference on Softw. Eng. and Adv. Applications (SEAA). (2009) 31 -38
  22. Sravan Kumar, R., Saxena, A.: Data integrity proofs in cloud storage. In: 3rd Int. Conf. on Communication Systems and Networks (COMSNETS). (2011) 1 -4
  23. Hao, Z., Zhong, S., Yu, N.: A privacy-preserving remote data integrity checking protocol with data dynamics and public verifiability. IEEE Trans. on Knowledge and Data Engineering 23(9) (2011) 1432-1437
  24. Ko, S.Y., Hoque, I., Cho, B., Gupta, I.: Making cloud intermediate data fault- tolerant. In: 1st ACM Symposium on Cloud computing. (2010) 181-192
  25. S. Abiteboul, P. Bourhis, A. Galland, and B. Marinoiu. The AXML artifact model. In Proc. of TIME 2009, pages 11-17, 2009.
  26. F. Baader, D. Calvanese, D. McGuinness, D. Nardi, and P. F. Patel-Schneider, editors. The De- scription Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation and Applications. Cambridge University Press, 2003.
  27. B. Bagheri Hariri, D. Calvanese, G. De Giacomo, and R. De Masellis. Verification of conjunctive-query based semantic artifacts. In Proc. of DL 2011, volume 745 of CEUR, ceur-ws.org, 2011.
  28. B. Bagheri Hariri, D. Calvanese, G. De Giacomo, R. De Masellis, and P. Felli. Foundations of relational artifacts verification. In Proc. of BPM 2011, volume 6896 of LNCS, pages 379-395. Springer, 2011.
  29. B. Bagheri Hariri, D. Calvanese, G. De Giacomo, A. Deutsch, and M. Montali. Verification of relational data-centric dynamic systems with external services. CoRR Technical Report arXiv:1203.0024, arXiv.org e-Print archive, 2012. Available at http://arxiv.org/ abs/1203.0024.
  30. F. Belardinelli, A. Lomuscio, and F. Patrizi. Verification of deployed artifact systems via data abstraction. In Proc. of ICSOC 2011, 2011.
  31. K. Bhattacharya, C. Gerede, R. Hull, R. Liu, and J. Su. Towards formal analysis of artifact- centric business process models. In Proc. of BPM 2007, volume 4714 of LNCS, pages 288-234. Springer, 2007.
  32. D. Calvanese, G. De Giacomo, D. Lembo, M. Lenzerini, A. Poggi, M. Rodríguez-Muro, and R. Rosati. Ontologies and databases: The DL-Lite approach. In S. Tessaris and E. Franconi, editors, Semantic Technologies for Informations Systems -5th Int. Reasoning Web Summer School (RW 2009), volume 5689 of LNCS, pages 255-356. Springer, 2009.
  33. D. Calvanese, G. De Giacomo, D. Lembo, M. Lenzerini, and R. Rosati. EQL-Lite: Effective first-order query processing in description logics. In Proc. of IJCAI 2007, 2007.
  34. D. Calvanese, G. De Giacomo, D. Lembo, M. Lenzerini, and R. Rosati. Tractable reasoning and efficient query answering in description logics: The DL-Lite family. J. of Automated Reasoning, 39(3):385-429, 2007.
  35. D. Calvanese, G. De Giacomo, D. Lembo, M. Lenzerini, and R. Rosati. Path-based identifica- tion constraints in description logics. In Proc. of KR 2008, pages 231-241, 2008.
  36. P. Cangialosi, G. De Giacomo, R. De Masellis, and R. Rosati. Conjunctive artifact-centric services. In Proc. of ICSOC 2010, volume 6470 of LNCS, pages 318-333. Springer, 2010.
  37. E. M. Clarke, O. Grumberg, and D. A. Peled. Model checking. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, 1999.
  38. D. Cohn and R. Hull. Business artifacts: A data-centric approach to modeling business operations and processes. IEEE Bull. on Data Engineering, 32(3):3-9, 2009.
  39. E. A. Emerson. Automated temporal reasoning about reactive systems. In F. Moller and G. Birtwistle, editors, Logics for Concurrency: Structure versus Automata, volume 1043 of LNCS, pages 41-101. Springer, 1996.
  40. A. Nigam and N. S. Caswell. Business artifacts: An approach to operational specification. IBM Systems Journal, 42(3):428-445, 2003.
  41. A. Poggi, D. Lembo, D. Calvanese, G. De Giacomo, M. Lenzerini, and R. Rosati. Linking data to ontologies. J. on Data Semantics, X:133-173, 2008.
  42. M. Rodríguez-Muro and D. Calvanese. Dependencies: Making ontology based data access work in practice. In Proc. of AMW 2011, volume 749 of CEUR, ceur-ws.org, 2011.
  43. W. M. P. van der Aalst, P. Barthelmess, C. A. Ellis, and J. Wainer. Proclets: A framework for lightweight interacting workflow processes. Int. J. of Cooperative Information Systems, 10(4):443-481, 2001.
  44. Agrawal, R., Gunopulos, D., Leymann, F.: Mining process models from workflow logs. In: EDBT'98 (1998)
  45. Alberti, M., Chesani, F., Gavanelli, M., Lamma, E., Mello, P., Torroni, P.: Verifi- able agent interaction in abductive logic programming: The sciff framework. ACM Trans. Comput. Log. 9(4) (2008)
  46. Ammon, D., Hoffmann, D., Jakob, T., Finkeissen, E., Detschew, V., Wetter, T.: Management of Knowledge-Intensive Healthcare Processes on the Example of Gen- eral Medical Documentation. In: BPM Workshops (2008)
  47. Chesani, F., Lamma, E., Mello, P., Montali, M., Riguzzi, F., Storari, S.: Exploiting inductive logic programming techniques for declarative process mining. T. Petri Nets and Other Models of Concurrency 2, 278-295 (2009)
  48. Chiao, C.M., Künzle, V., Reichert, M.: Towards Object-aware Process Support in Healthcare Information Systems. In: eTELEMED 2012 (2012)
  49. Cohen, W.W., Carvalho, V.R., Mitchell, T.M.: Learning to classify email into "speech acts". In: EMNLP. pp. 309-316. ACL (2004)
  50. Combi, C., Gambini, M., Migliorini, S., Posenato, R.: Modelling temporal, data- centric medical processes. In: ACM SIGHIT IHI 2012 (2012)
  51. Cook, J.E., Wolf, A.L.: Discovering models of software processes from event-based data. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 7(3), 215-249 (1998)
  52. Cortadella, J., Kishinevsky, M., Lavagno, L., Yakovlev, A.: Deriving petri nets from finite transition systems. IEEE Trans. on Computers 47(8), 859 -882 (1998)
  53. Dadam, P., Reichert, M., Kuhn, K.: Clinical Workflows -The Killer Application for Process-oriented Information Systems? In: BIS'00 (2000)
  54. Davenport, T.H.: Improving knowledge work processes. In: Sloan Management Review, vol. 37 (1996)
  55. De Giacomo, G., Lespérance, Y., Levesque, H., Sardina, S.: IndiGolog: A High- Level Programming Language for Embedded Reasoning Agents. In: Multi-Agent Prog.: Languages, Platforms and Applications (2009)
  56. de Leoni, M., Marrella, A., Mecella, M., Sardina, S.: SmartPM -Featuring Au- tomatic Adaptation to Unplanned Exceptions. Tech. rep., Sapienza Università di Roma (2011), http://ojs.uniroma1.it/index.php/DIS_TechnicalReports/ article/view/9221/9141
  57. de Leoni, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.M.: Visual support for work assignment in process-aware information systems. In: BPM'08 (2008)
  58. Desel, J., Reisig, W.: The synthesis problem of petri nets. Acta Informatica 33, 297-315 (1996)
  59. Di Ciccio, C., Catarci, T., Mecella, M.: Representing and visualizing mined artful processes in MailOfMine. In: HCI-KDD (2011)
  60. Di Ciccio, C., Mecella, M.: MINERful, a mining algorithm for declarative process constraints in MailOfMine. Tech. rep., Sapienza Università di Roma (2012), http: //ojs.uniroma1.it/index.php/DIS_TechnicalReports/issue/view/416
  61. Di Ciccio, C., Mecella, M.: Mining constraints for artful processes. In: BIS'12 (2012)
  62. Di Ciccio, C., Mecella, M., Scannapieco, M., Zardetto, D., Catarci, T.: MailOfMine -analyzing mail messages for mining artful collaborative processes. In: SIMPDA'11 (2011)
  63. Ferreira, H., Ferreira, D.: An Integrated Life Cycle for Workflow Management Based on Learning and Planning. Int. J. Coop. Inf. Syst. 15 (2006)
  64. Field, M.J., Lohr, K.N.: Clinical Practice Guidelines: Directions for a New Pro- gram. Institute of Medicine, Washington, DC (1990)
  65. Friedrich, G., Fugini, M., Mussi, E., Pernici, B., Tagni, G.: Exception Handling for Repair in Service-Based Processes. IEEE Trans. on Soft. Eng. 36 (2010)
  66. Gajewski, M., Meyer, H., Momotko, M., Schuschel, H., Weske, M.: Dynamic Failure Recovery of Generated Workflows. In: DEXA'05 (2005)
  67. Gronau, N., Weber, E.: Management of knowledge intensive business processes. In: BPM'04 (2004)
  68. Hildebrandt, T.T., Mukkamala, R.R.: Declarative event-based workflow as dis- tributed dynamic condition response graphs. In: PLACES'10 (2010)
  69. Hill, C., Yates, R., Jones, C., Kogan, S.L.: Beyond predictable workflows: Enhanc- ing productivity in artful business processes. IBM Syst. J. 45(4), 663-682 (2006)
  70. Isern, D., Moreno, A.: Computer-based execution of clinical guidelines: a review. Int. J. of Medical Informatics 77(12) (2008)
  71. Jarvis, P., Moore, J., Stader, J., Macintosh, A., du Mont, A.C., Chung, P.: Ex- ploiting AI Technologies to Realise Adaptive Workflow Systems. AAAI Workshop on Agent-Based Systems in the Business Context (1999)
  72. Kemsley, S.: The Changing Nature of Work: From Structured to Unstructured, from Controlled to Social. In: BPM'11 (2011)
  73. Lenz, R., Peleg, M., Reichert, M.: Healthcare Process Support: Achievements, Challenges, Current Research. IJKBO (2012)
  74. Lenz, R., Reichert, M.: IT support for healthcare processes -Premises, challenges, perspectives. Data & Know. Eng. 61(1) (2007)
  75. Lyng, K.M., Hildebrandt, T.T., Mukkamala, R.R.: From Paper Based Clinical Practice Guidelines to Declarative Workflow Management. In: BPM (2008)
  76. Maggi, F.M., Mooij, A.J., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: User-guided discovery of declar- ative process models. In: CIDM. pp. 192-199. IEEE (2011)
  77. Marrella, A., Mecella, M.: Continuous Planning for Solving Business Process Adap- tivity. In: BPMDS'11 (2011)
  78. de Man, H.: Case Management: A Review of Modeling Approaches. BPTrends, www.bptrends.com (2009)
  79. Mans, R.S., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Russell, N.C., Bakker, P.J.M., Moleman, A.J.: Process-Aware Information System Development for the Healthcare Domain -Con- sistency, Reliability, and Effectiveness. In: BPM Workshops (2009)
  80. Marjanovic, O.: Improving Knowledge-Intensive Health Care Processes beyond Ef- ficiency. In: ICIS'11 (2011)
  81. Medeiros, A.K., Weijters, A.J., Aalst, W.M.: Genetic process mining: an experi- mental evaluation. Data Min. Knowl. Discov. 14(2), 245-304 (2007)
  82. Mulyar, N., van der Aalst, W.M., Peleg, M.: A Pattern-based Analysis of Clinical Computer-interpretable Guideline Modeling Languages. JAMIA 14(6) (2007)
  83. Mulyar, N., Pesic, M., Van Der Aalst, W.M.P., Peleg, M.: Declarative and proce- dural approaches for modelling clinical guidelines: addressing flexibility issues. In: BPM'07 (2007)
  84. Murata, T.: Petri nets: Properties, analysis and applications. Proceedings of the IEEE 77(4), 541 -580 (1989)
  85. Peleg, M.e.a.: Comparing Computer-Interpretable Guideline Models: A Case-Study Approach. JAMIA 10(1) (2003)
  86. Pesic, M., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: A declarative approach for flexible business processes management. In: BPM Workshops (2006)
  87. Pesic, M., Schonenberg, H., van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Declare: Full support for loosely-structured processes. In: EDOC. pp. 287-300 (2007)
  88. R-Moreno, M.D., Borrajo, D., Cesta, A., Oddi, A.: Integrating planning and scheduling in workflow domains. Expert Syst. with App. 33(2) (2007)
  89. Reichert, M.: What BPM technology can do for healthcare process support. In: AIME'11 (2011)
  90. Reichert, M., Rinderle-Ma, S., Dadam, P.: Flexibility in Process-Aware Information Systems. In: Trans. on Petri Nets and Other Models of Concurrency II (2009)
  91. Reiter, R.: Knowledge in Action: Logical Foundations for Specifying and Imple- menting Dynamical Systems. The MIT Press (2001)
  92. Sonnenberg, F.A., Hagerty, C.G.: Computer-Interpretable Clinical Practice Guide- lines. Where are we and where are we going? Yearbook of Medical Inf. 45 (2006)
  93. ter Hofstede, A., van der Aalst, W., Adams, M., Russell, N.: Modern Business Process Automation: YAWL and its Support Environment. Springer (2009)
  94. Vaculin, R., Hull, R., Heath, T., Cochran, C., Nigam, A., Sukaviriya, P.: Declarative business artifact centric modeling of decision and knowledge intensive business processes. In: EDOC '11 (2011)
  95. van der Aalst, W.M.P., Rubin, V., Verbeek, H., van Dongen, B., Kindler, E., Günther, C.: Process mining: a two-step approach to balance between underfit- ting and overfitting. Software and Systems Modeling 9, 87-111 (2010)
  96. van der Aalst, W.M.P.: The application of petri nets to workflow management. Journal of Circuits, Systems, and Computers 8(1), 21-66 (1998)
  97. van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Process Mining: Discovery, Conformance and Enhancement of Business Processes. Springer (2011)
  98. van der Aalst, W.M.P., van Dongen, B.F., Günther, C.W., Rozinat, A., Verbeek, E., Weijters, T.: Prom: The process mining toolkit. In: BPM'09 (Demos) (2009)
  99. van der Aalst, W.M.P., Nikolov, A.: Mining e-mail messages: Uncovering interac- tion patterns and processes using e-mail logs. IJIIT 4(3), 27-45 (2008)
  100. van der Aalst, W.M.P., Pesic, M.: DecSerFlow: Towards a truly declarative service flow language. In: WS-FM. LNCS, vol. 4184, pp. 1-23. Springer (2006)
  101. van der Aalst, W.M.P., Pesic, M., Schonenberg, H.: Declarative workflows: Balanc- ing between flexibility and support. Comp. Sc. -R&D 23(2), 99-113 (2009)
  102. van der Aalst, W.M.P., Weijters, T., Maruster, L.: Workflow mining: Discovering process models from event logs. IEEE Trans. K. D. Eng. 16(9), 1128-1142 (2004)
  103. van der Aalst, W.M.P., Weske, M.: Case handling: a new paradigm for business process support. Data & Know. Eng. 53(2) (2005)
  104. Wang, D., Peleg, M., Tu, S., Boxwala, A., Greenes, R., Patel, V., Shortliffe, E.: Representation Primitives, Process Models and Patient Data in Computer- Interpretable Clinical Practice Guidelines: A Literature Review of Guideline Rep- resentation Models. Int. J. of Medical Informatics 68 (2002)
  105. Wang, D., Peleg, M., Tu, S.W., Boxwala, A.A., Ogunyemi, O., Zeng, Q., Greenes, R.A., Patel, V.L., Shortliffe, E.H.: Design and implementation of the GLIF3 guide- line execution engine. J. of Biomedical Informatics 37(5) (2004)
  106. Warren, P., Kings, N., Thurlow, I., Davies, J., Buerger, T., Simperl, E., Ruiz, C., Gomez-Perez, J.M., Ermolayev, V., Ghani, R., Tilly, M., Bösser, T., Imtiaz, A.: Improving knowledge worker productivity -the Active integrated approach. BT Technology Journal 26(2), 165-176 (2009)
  107. Weber, B., Reichert, M., Rinderle-Ma, S.: Change Patterns and Change Sup- port Features -Enhancing Flexibility in Process-aware Information Systems. Data Knowl. Eng. 66 (2008)
  108. Weber, B., Wild, W., Lauer, M., Reichert, M.: Improving Exception Handling by Discovering Change Dependencies in Adaptive Process Management Systems. In: BPI'06 (2006)
  109. Weijters, A., van der Aalst, W.: Rediscovering workflow models from event-based data using little thumb. Integrated Computer-Aided Engineering 10, 2003 (2001)
  110. Wen, L., van der Aalst, W.M.P., Wang, J., Sun, J.: Mining process models with non-free-choice constructs. Data Min. Knowl. Discov. 15(2), 145-180 (2007)
  111. Westergaard, M.: Better algorithms for analyzing and enacting declarative work- flow languages using LTL. In: BPM'11 (2011)
  112. M. Alberti, M. Gavanelli, E. Lamma, P. Mello, P. Torroni, and G. Sartor. Mapping of Deontic Operators to Abductive Expectations. NORMAS, pages 126-136, 2005.
  113. Marco Alberti, Federico Chesani, Marco Gavanelli, Evelina Lamma, Paola Mello, and Paolo Torroni. Verifiable agent interaction in abductive logic programming: the SCIFF framework. ACM Trans. Comput. Log., 9(4), 2008.
  114. G. Antoniou, D. Billington, G. Governatori, and M. J. Maher. Representation results for defeasible logic. ACM Trans. on Computational Logic, 2:255-287, 2001.
  115. Ahmed Awad, Gero Decker, and Mathias Weske. Efficient compliance checking using BPMN-Q and temporal logic, LNCS 5240. In BPM, pages 326-341. Springer, 2008.
  116. K. Bhattacharya, C. Gerede, R. Hull, R. Liu, and J. Su. Towards formal analysis of artifact-centric business process models. In BPM, pages 288-304, 2007.
  117. A. Biere, A. Cimatti, E. M. Clarke, O. Strichman, and Y. Zhu. Bounded model checking. Advances in Computers, 58:118-149, 2003.
  118. D. D'Aprile, L. Giordano, V. Gliozzi, A. Martelli, G. L. Pozzato, and D. Theseider Dupré. Verifying business process compliance by reasoning about actions. In CLIMA XI, pages 99-116, 2010.
  119. M. Denecker, D. Theseider Dupré, and K. Van Belleghem. An inductive definitions approach to ramifications. Electronic Transactions on Artificial Intelligence, 2:25- 97, 1998.
  120. A. Deutsch, R. Hull, F. Patrizi, and V. Vianu. Automatic verification of data- centric business processes. In ICDT, pages 252-267, 2009.
  121. N. Fornara and M. Colombetti. Defining Interaction Protocols using a Commitment-based Agent Communication Language. AAMAS03, pages 520-527.
  122. M. Gelfond. Answer Sets. Handbook of Knowledge Representation, chapter 7, Elsevier, 2007.
  123. A. Ghose and G. Koliadis. Auditing business process compliance. ICSOC, LNCS 4749, pages 169-180, 2007.
  124. C. Giblin, S. Müller, and B. Pfitzmann. From Regulatory Policies to Event Mon- itoring Rules: Towards Model-Driven Compliance Automation. IBM Reasearch Report, 2007.
  125. L. Giordano, A. Martelli, and C. Schwind. Specifying and Verifying Interaction Protocols in a Temporal Action Logic. Journal of Applied Logic, 5:214-234, 2007.
  126. L. Giordano, A. Martelli, and D. Theseider Dupré. Achieving completeness in bounded model checking of action theories in ASP. In Proc. KR 2012.
  127. L. Giordano, A. Martelli, and D. Theseider Dupré. Reasoning about actions with temporal answer sets. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming, 2012.
  128. G. Governatori and A. Rotolo. Logic of Violations: A Gentzen System for Reason- ing with Contrary-To-Duty Obligations. Australasian Journal of Logic, 4:193-215, 2006.
  129. G. Governatori and S. Sadiq. The journey to business process compliance. Hand- book of Research on BPM, IGI Global, pages 426-454, 2009.
  130. Guido Governatori. Law, logic and business processes. In Third International Workshop on Requirements Engineering and Law. IEEE, 2010.
  131. F. Guerin and J. Pitt. Verification and Compliance Testing. Communications in Multiagent Systems, Springer LNAI 2650, 2003.
  132. K. Heljanko and I. Niemelä. Bounded LTL model checking with stable models. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming, 3(4-5):519-550, 2003.
  133. J.G. Henriksen and P.S. Thiagarajan. Dynamic Linear Time Temporal Logic. Annals of Pure and Applied logic, 96(1-3):187-207, 1999.
  134. J. Hoffmann, I. Weber, and G. Governatori. On compliance checking for clausal constraints in annotated process models. Information Systems Frontieres, 2009.
  135. D. Knuplesch, L. T. Ly, S. Rinderle-Ma, H. Pfeifer, and P. Dadam. On enabling data-aware compliance checking of business process models. In Proc. ER 2010, 29th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling, pages 332-346, 2010.
  136. M. Montali, P. Torroni, F. Chesani, P. Mello, M. Alberti, and E. Lamma. Ab- ductive logic programming as an effective technology for the static verification of declarative business processes. Fundam. Inform., 102(3-4):325-361, 2010.
  137. S. Narayanan and S. McIlraith. Simulation, verification and automated composi- tion of web services. In Proc. 11th Int. World Wide Web Conference, WWW2002, pages 77-88, 2002.
  138. A. Nigam and N. S. Caswell. Business artifacts: An approach to operational spec- ification. IBM Systems Journal, 42(3):428445, 2003.
  139. Maja Pesic and Wil M. P. van der Aalst. A declarative approach for flexible business processes management. In Business Process Management Workshops, LNCS 4103, pages 169-180. Springer, 2006.
  140. D. Roman and M. Kifer. Semantic web service choreography: Contracting and enactment. In International Semantic Web Conference, LNCS 5318, pages 550- 566, 2008.
  141. M. P. Singh. A social semantics for Agent Communication Languages. Issues in Agent Communication, LNCS(LNAI) 1916, pages 31-45, 2000.
  142. A. M. ter Hofstede, W. M. P. van der Aalst, M. Adamns, and N. Russell. Modern Business Process Automation: YAWL and its Support Environment. 2010.
  143. Wil M. P. van der Aalst and Maja Pesic. Decserflow: Towards a truly declara- tive service flow language. In The Role of Business Processes in Service Oriented Architectures, volume 06291 of Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings, 2006.
  144. I. Weber, J. Hoffmann, and J. Mendling. Beyond soundness: On the verification of semantic business process models. Distributed and Parallel Databases (DAPD), 2010.
  145. M. Winslett. Reasoning about action using a possible models approach. In Proc. AAAI 88, 7th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 89-93, 1988.
  146. P. Yolum and M.P. Singh. Flexible Protocol Specification and Execution: Applying Event Calculus Planning using Commitments. AAMAS'02, pages 527-534, 2002. References
  147. Bobrik, R., Reichert, M., Bauer, T.: Parameterizable views for process visualization. Tech. rep., Centre for Telematics and Information Technology, University of Twente (2007)
  148. Bobrik, R., Reichert, M., Bauer, T.: View-based process visualization. In: Proc. BPM. pp. 88-95. Springer (2007)
  149. Cardoso, J., Sheth, A., Miller, J., Arnold, J., Kochut, K.: Quality of service for workflows and web service processes. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 1(3), 281 -308 (2004)
  150. Ehrig, M., Koschmider, A., Oberweis, A.: Measuring similarity between semantic business process models. In: Proc. APCCM. pp. 71-80. Australian Computer Society (2007)
  151. Fahland, D., van der Aalst, W.: Simplifying mined process models: An approach based on unfoldings. In: Rinderle-Ma, S., Toumani, F., Wolf, K. (eds.) Business Process Management, LNCS, vol. 6896, pp. 362-378. Springer (2011)
  152. Gottschalk, F., La Rosa, M.: Process configuration in yawl. In: Hofstede, A.H.M., Aalst, W.M.P., Adams, M., Russell, N. (eds.) Modern Business Process Automation, pp. 313-382. Springer (2010)
  153. Gottschalk, F., Wagemakers, T., Jansen-Vullers, M., van der Aalst, W., La Rosa, M.: Con- figurable process models: Experiences from a municipality case study. In: Advanced Infor- mation Systems Engineering, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5565, pp. 486-500. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg (2009)
  154. La Rosa, M., van der Aalst, W., Dumas, M., ter Hofstede, A.: Questionnaire-based variability modeling for system configuration. Software and Systems Modeling 8, 251-274 (2009)
  155. Liu, D.R., Shen, M.: Workflow modeling for virtual processes: an order-preserving process- view approach. Information Systems 28, 505 -532 (2003)
  156. Mayer, W., Killisperger, P., Stumptner, M., Grossmann, G.: A declarative framework for work process configuration. AI EDAM 25(2), 145-165 (2011)
  157. Pankratius, V., Stucky, W.: A formal foundation for workflow composition, workflow view definition, and workflow normalization based on petri nets. In: APCCM. pp. 79-88. APCCM '05, Australian Computer Society (2005)
  158. Polyvyanyy, A., Smirnov, S., Weske, M.: Process model abstraction: A slider approach. In: EDOC. pp. 325-331 (2008)
  159. Polyvyanyy, A., Smirnov, S., Weske, M.: Business process model abstraction. In: Handbook on Business Process Management 1, pp. 149-166. Springer (2010)
  160. Smirnov, S., Dijkman, R., Mendling, J., Weske, M.: Meronymy-based aggregation of activ- ities in business process models. In: Parsons, J., Saeki, M., Shoval, P., Woo, C., Wand, Y. (eds.) Conceptual Modeling ER 2010, LNCS, vol. 6412, pp. 1-14. Springer (2010)
  161. Smirnov, S., Reijers, H., Weske, M., Nugteren, T.: Business process model abstraction: a definition, catalog, and survey. Distributed and Parallel Databases 30, 63-99 (2012) References
  162. M. Balduccini. Modules and signature declarations for a-prolog: Progress report. In Work- shop on Software Engineering for Answer Set Programming (SEA 2007), pages 41-55, 2007.
  163. Chitta Baral, Juraj Dzifcak, and Hiro Takahashi. Macros, macro calls and use of ensembles in modular answer set programming. In Sandro Etalle and Miroslaw Truszczynski, editors, Logic Programming, volume 4079 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 376-390. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, 2006.
  164. S. Baselice, P. Bonatti, and M. Gelfond. Towards an integration of answer set and constraint solving. In Maurizio Gabbrielli and Gopal Gupta, editors, Logic Programming, volume 3668 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 52-66. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, 2005.
  165. Gerhard Brewka and Thomas Eiter. Equilibria in heterogeneous nonmonotonic multi-context systems. In Proceedings of the 22nd national conference on Artificial intelligence -Volume 1, pages 385-390. AAAI Press, 2007.
  166. Maria de la Banda, Kim Marriott, Reza Rafeh, and Mark Wallace. The modelling language zinc. In Frédéric Benhamou, editor, Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming -CP 2006, volume 4204 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 700-705. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, 2006.
  167. M. Denecker and E. Ternovska. A logic of non-monotone inductive definitions. Transactions on Computational Logic, 9(2):1-51, 2008.
  168. Thomas Eiter, Georg Gottlob, and Helmut Veith. Modular logic programming and general- ized quantifiers. In Jürgen Dix, Ulrich Furbach, and Anil Nerode, editors, Logic Program- ming And Nonmonotonic Reasoning, volume 1265 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 289-308. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, 1997.
  169. Thomas Eiter, Giovambattista Ianni, Roman Schindlauer, and Hans Tompits. A uniform integration of higher-order reasoning and external evaluations in answer-set programming. In Proceedings of the 19th international joint conference on Artificial intelligence, pages 90-96, San Francisco, CA, USA, 2005. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.
  170. Islam Elkabani, Enrico Pontelli, and Tran Son. Smodels A -a system for computing answer sets of logic programs with aggregates. In Chitta Baral, Gianluigi Greco, Nicola Leone, and Giorgio Terracina, editors, Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning, volume 3662 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 427-431. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, 2005.
  171. O. Elkhatib, E. Pontelli, and T.C. Son. Asp -prolog: A system for reasoning about answer set programs in prolog. In Proc. of Practical Aspects of Declarative Languages, 6th Inter- national Symposium, (PADL 2004), volume 3057, pages 148-162, Dallas, TX, USA, 2004.
  172. Pierre Flener, Justin Pearson, and Magnus Ågren. Introducing ESRA, a relational language for modelling combinatorial problems. In Maurice Bruynooghe, editor, Logic Based Pro- gram Synthesis and Transformation, volume 3018 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 214-232. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, 2004.
  173. Alan M. Frisch, Warwick Harvey, Chris Jefferson, Bernadette Martínez-Hernández, and Ian Miguel. Essence: A constraint language for specifying combinatorial problems. Constraints, 13:268-306, September 2008.
  174. Tomi Janhunen, Emilia Oikarinen, Hans Tompits, and Stefan Woltran. Modularity aspects of disjunctive stable models. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 35:813-857, August 2009.
  175. Matti Järvisalo, Emilia Oikarinen, Tomi Janhunen, and Ilkka Niemelä. A module-based framework for multi-language constraint modeling. In Esra Erdem, Fangzhen Lin, and Torsten Schaub, editors, Logic Programming and Nonmonotonic Reasoning, volume 5753 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 155-168. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, 2009.
  176. Antonina Kolokolova, Yongmei Liu, David Mitchell, and Eugenia Ternovska. On the com- plexity of model expansion. In Proceedings of the 17th international conference on Logic for programming, artificial intelligence, and reasoning, LPAR'10, pages 447-458, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2010. Springer-Verlag.
  177. Veena Mellarkod, Michael Gelfond, and Yuanlin Zhang. Integrating answer set program- ming and constraint logic programming. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 53:251-287, 2008.
  178. David G. Mitchell and Eugenia Ternovska. A framework for representing and solving np search problems. In Proceedings of the 20th national conference on Artificial intelligence - Volume 1, pages 430-435. AAAI Press, 2005.
  179. Emilia Oikarinen and Tomi Janhunen. Modular equivalence for normal logic programs. In Proceeding of the 2006 conference on ECAI 2006: 17th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence August 29 -September 1, 2006, Riva del Garda, Italy, pages 412-416, Amster- dam, The Netherlands, The Netherlands, 2006. IOS Press.
  180. T. Swift and D. S. Warren. The XSB System, 2009.
  181. L. Tari, C. Baral, and S. Anwar. A language for modular answer set programming: Appli- cation to ACC tournament scheduling. In Proc. of Answer Set Programming: Advances in Theory and Implementation, CEUR-WS, pages 277-292, 2005.
  182. S. Tasharrofi and E. Ternovska. A semantic account for modularity in multi-language mod- elling of search problems. In FroCoS 2011.
  183. S. Tasharrofi, X. Wu, and E. Ternovska. Solving modular model expansion tasks. In WLP/INAP 2011.

Related papers

Ontology-Based Governance of Data-Aware Processes
Marco Montali

2012

In this paper we show how one can use the technology developed recently for Ontology-Based Data Access (OBDA) to govern data-aware processes through ontologies. In particular, we consider processes executed over a relational database which issue calls to external services to acquire new information and update the data.

View PDFchevron_right
A Temporal Description Logic for Reasoning over Conceptual Schemas and Queries
Michael Zakharyaschev

Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2002

This paper introduces a new logical formalism, intended for temporal conceptual modelling, as a natural combination of the well-known description logic ÄÊ and point-based linear temporal logic with Since and Until. The expressive power of the resulting ÄÊÍË logic is illustrated by providing a characterisation of the most important temporal conceptual modelling constructs appeared in the literature. We define a query language (where queries are non-recursive Datalog programs and atoms are complex ÄÊÍË expressions) and investigate the problem of checking query containment under the constraints defined by ÄÊÍË conceptual schemas-i.e., ÄÊÍË knowledge bases-as well as the problems of schema satisfiability and logical implication. Although it is shown that reasoning in full ÄÊÍË is undecidable, we identify the decidable (in a sense, maximal) fragment ÄÊ ÍË by allowing applications of temporal operators to formulas and class expressions only (but not to relation expressions). We obtain the following hierarchy of complexity results: (a) reasoning in ÄÊ ÍË with atomic formulas is EXPTIME-complete, (b) satisfiability and logical implication of arbitrary ÄÊ ÍË formulas is EXPSPACE-complete, and (c) the problem of checking query containment of non-recursive Datalog queries under ÄÊ ÍË constraints is decidable in 2EXPTIME.

View PDFchevron_right
Managing temporal knowledge in deductive databases
Michael Böhlen

1994

Many applications have to deal with a large amount of data which not only represent the perceived state of the real world at present, but also past and/or future states. This type of time-varying data arises for example in banking and insurance applications, in health care, in planning and scheduling problems, and in ticket reservation systems. These applications are not served adequately by today's database systems. In particular, deletions and updates in such systems have destructive semantics. This means that previous database contents (repre¬ senting previous perceived states of the real world) cannot be accessed anymore. Moreover, the formulation of queries which access different database states is often tedious and hence error prone without special support for the temporal dimension. Temporal database systems have been developed to provide this kind of support. They assume that all data values are associated with timestamps which repre¬ sent the time during which this data...

View PDFchevron_right
A Cookbook for Temporal Conceptual Data Modelling with Description Logics
Michael Zakharyaschev

ACM Transactions on Computational Logic, 2014

We design temporal description logics suitable for reasoning about temporal conceptual data models and investigate their computational complexity. Our formalisms are based on DL-Lite logics with three types of concept inclusions (ranging from atomic concept inclusions and disjointness to the full Booleans), as well as cardinality constraints and role inclusions. The logics are interpreted over the Cartesian products of object domains and the flow of time (Z, <), satisfying the constant domain assumption. Concept and role inclusions of the TBox hold at all moments of time (globally) and data assertions of the ABox hold at specified moments of time. To express temporal constraints of conceptual data models, the languages are equipped with flexible and rigid roles, standard future and past temporal operators on concepts and operators 'always' and 'sometime' on roles. The most expressive of our temporal description logics (which can capture lifespan cardinalities and either qualitative or quantitative evolution constraints) turns out to be undecidable. However, by omitting some of the temporal operators on concepts/roles or by restricting the form of concept inclusions we construct logics whose complexity ranges between NLOGSPACE and PSPACE. These positive results are obtained by reduction to various clausal fragments of propositional temporal logic, which opens a way to employ propositional or first-order temporal provers for reasoning about temporal data models. Zakharyaschev. 2014. A cookbook for temporal conceptual data modelling with description logics.

View PDFchevron_right
TOQL: Temporal Ontology Querying Language
Nikos Papadakis

Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2009

We introduce TOQL, a query language for querying time information in ontologies. TOQL is a high level query language that handles ontologies almost like relational databases. Queries are issued as SQL-like statements involving time (i.e., time points or intervals) or high-level ontology concepts that vary in time. Although independent from TOQL, this work suggests a mechanism for representing time evolving concepts in ontologies based on the four-dimensional perdurantist mechanism. However, TOQL prevents users from being familiar with the representation of time in ontologies. To show proof of concept, an application has been developed that supports translation and execution of TOQL queries on temporal ontologies combined with a reasoning mechanism based on event calculus. A real world temporal ontology is also implemented on which several TOQL example queries are processed and discussed.

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Computer Science
  • Relational Database
  • Ontology
  • Knowledge Intensive Business Ser...
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved