Context Mediation in the Semantic Web: Handling OWL Ontology and Data Disparity through Context Interchange

The COntext INterchange (COIN) strategy is an approach to solving the problem of interoperability of semantically heterogeneous data sources through context mediation. COIN has used its own notation and syntax for representing ontologies. More recently, the OWL Web Ontology Language is becoming established as the W3C recommended ontology language. We propose the use of the COIN strategy to solve context disparity and ontology interoperability problems in the emerging Semantic Web – both at the ontology level and at the data level. In conjunction with this, we propose a version of the COIN ontology model that uses OWL and the emerging rules interchange language, RuleML.

Taxonomic Syntax for First-Order Inference

Most knowledge representation languages are based on classes and taxonomic relationships between classes. Taxonomic hierarchies without defaults or exceptions are semantically equivalent to a collection of formulas in first order predicate calculus. Although designers of knowledge representation languages often express an intuitive feeling that there must be some advantage to representing facts as taxonomic relationships rather than first order formulas, there are few, if any, technical results supporting this intuition. We attempt to remedy this situation by presenting a taxonomic syntax for first order predicate calculus and a series of theorems that support the claim that taxonomic syntax is superior to classical syntax.

Natural Language Syntax and First Order Preference

We have argued elsewhere that first order inference can be made more efficient by using non-standard syntax for first order logic. In this paper we show how a fragment of English syntax under Montague semantics provides the foundation of a new inference procedure. This procedure seems more effective than corresponding procedures based on either classical syntax of our previously proposed taxonomic syntax. This observation may provide a functional explanation for some of the syntactic structure of English.

Syntax-Based Analytic Reading of Musical Scores

As part of a larger research project in musical structure, a program has been written which "reads" scores encoded in an input language isomorphic to music notation. The program is believed to be the first of its kind. From a small number of parsing rules the program derives complex configurations, each of which is associated with a set of reference points in a numerical representation of a time-continuum. The logical structure of the program is such that all and only the defined classes of events are represented in the output. Because the basis of the program is syntactic (in the sense that parsing operations are performed on formal structures in the input string), many extensions and refinements can be made without excessive difficulty. The program can be applied to any music which can be represented in the input language. At present, however, it constitutes the first stage in the development of a set of analytic tools for the study of so-called atonal music, the revolutionary and little understood music which has exerted a decisive influence upon contemporary practice of the art. The program and the approach to automatic data-structuring may be of interest to linguists and scholars in other fields concerned with basic studies of complex structures produced by human beings.

Type-alpha DPLs

This paper introduces Denotational Proof Languages (DPLs). DPLs are languages for presenting, discovering, and checking formal proofs. In particular, in this paper we discus type-alpha DPLs---a simple class of DPLs for which termination is guaranteed and proof checking can be performed in time linear in the size of the proof. Type-alpha DPLs allow for lucid proof presentation and for efficient proof checking, but not for proof search. Type-omega DPLs allow for search as well as simple presentation and checking, but termination is no longer guaranteed and proof checking may diverge. We do not study type-omega DPLs here. We start by listing some common characteristics of DPLs. We then illustrate with a particularly simple example: a toy type-alpha DPL called PAR, for deducing parities. We present the abstract syntax of PAR, followed by two different kinds of formal semantics: evaluation and denotational. We then relate the two semantics and show how proof checking becomes tantamount to evaluation. We proceed to develop the proof theory of PAR, formulating and studying certain key notions such as observational equivalence that pervade all DPLs. We then present NDL, a type-alpha DPL for classical zero-order natural deduction. Our presentation of NDL mirrors that of PAR, showing how every basic concept that was introduced in PAR resurfaces in NDL. We present sample proofs of several well-known tautologies of propositional logic that demonstrate our thesis that DPL proofs are readable, writable, and concise. Next we contrast DPLs to typed logics based on the Curry-Howard isomorphism, and discuss the distinction between pure and augmented DPLs. Finally we consider the issue of implementing DPLs, presenting an implementation of PAR in SML and one in Athena, and end with some concluding remarks.

Type-omega DPLs

Type-omega DPLs (Denotational Proof Languages) are languages for proof presentation and search that offer strong soundness guarantees. LCF-type systems such as HOL offer similar guarantees, but their soundness relies heavily on static type systems. By contrast, DPLs ensure soundness dynamically, through their evaluation semantics; no type system is necessary. This is possible owing to a novel two-tier syntax that separates deductions from computations, and to the abstraction of assumption bases, which is factored into the semantics of the language and allows for sound evaluation. Every type-omega DPL properly contains a type-alpha DPL, which can be used to present proofs in a lucid and detailed form, exclusively in terms of primitive inference rules. Derived inference rules are expressed as user-defined methods, which are "proof recipes" that take arguments and dynamically perform appropriate deductions. Methods arise naturally via parametric abstraction over type-alpha proofs. In that light, the evaluation of a method call can be viewed as a computation that carries out a type-alpha deduction. The type-alpha proof "unwound" by such a method call is called the "certificate" of the call. Certificates can be checked by exceptionally simple type-alpha interpreters, and thus they are useful whenever we wish to minimize our trusted base. Methods are statically closed over lexical environments, but dynamically scoped over assumption bases. They can take other methods as arguments, they can iterate, and they can branch conditionally. These capabilities, in tandem with the bifurcated syntax of type-omega DPLs and their dynamic assumption-base semantics, allow the user to define methods in a style that is disciplined enough to ensure soundness yet fluid enough to permit succinct and perspicuous expression of arbitrarily sophisticated derived inference rules. We demonstrate every major feature of type-omega DPLs by defining and studying NDL-omega, a higher-order, lexically scoped, call-by-value type-omega DPL for classical zero-order natural deduction---a simple choice that allows us to focus on type-omega syntax and semantics rather than on the subtleties of the underlying logic. We start by illustrating how type-alpha DPLs naturally lead to type-omega DPLs by way of abstraction; present the formal syntax and semantics of NDL-omega; prove several results about it, including soundness; give numerous examples of methods; point out connections to the lambda-phi calculus, a very general framework for type-omega DPLs; introduce a notion of computational and deductive cost; define several instrumented interpreters for computing such costs and for generating certificates; explore the use of type-omega DPLs as general programming languages; show that DPLs do not have to be type-less by formulating a static Hindley-Milner polymorphic type system for NDL-omega; discuss some idiosyncrasies of type-omega DPLs such as the potential divergence of proof checking; and compare type-omega DPLs to other approaches to proof presentation and discovery. Finally, a complete implementation of NDL-omega in SML-NJ is given for users who want to run the examples and experiment with the language.

Leveraging Learning and Language Via Communication Bootstrapping

In a Communication Bootstrapping system, peer components with different perceptual worlds invent symbols and syntax based on correlations between their percepts. I propose that Communication Bootstrapping can also be used to acquire functional definitions of words and causal reasoning knowledge. I illustrate this point with several examples, then sketch the architecture of a system in progress which attempts to execute this task.

Determining the Scope of English Quantifiers

How can one represent the meaning of English sentences in a formal logical notation such that the translation of English into this logical form is simple and general? This report answers this question for a particular kind of meaning, namely quantifier scope, and for a particular part of the translation, namely the syntactic influence on the translation. Rules are presented which predict, for example, that the sentence: Everyone in this room speaks at least two languages. has the quantifier scope AE in standard predicate calculus, while the sentence: At lease two languages are spoken by everyone in this room. has the quantifier scope EA. Three different logical forms are presented, and their translation rules are examined. One of the logical forms is predicate calculus. The translation rules for it were developed by Robert May (May 19 77). The other two logical forms are Skolem form and a simple computer programming language. The translation rules for these two logical forms are new. All three sets of translation rules are shown to be general, in the sense that the same rules express the constraints that syntax imposes on certain other linguistic phenomena. For example, the rules that constrain the translation into Skolem form are shown to constrain definite np anaphora as well. A large body of carefully collected data is presented, and used to assess the empirical accuracy of each of the theories. None of the three theories is vastly superior to the others. However, the report concludes by suggesting that a combination of the two newer theories would have the greatest generality and the highest empirical accuracy.

Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs

"The Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs" is the entry-level subject in Computer Science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. It is required of all students at MIT who major in Electrical Engineering or in Computer Science, as one fourth of the "common core curriculum," which also includes two subjects on circuits and linear systems and a subject on the design of digital systems. We have been involved in the development of this subject since 1978, and we have taught this material in its present form since the fall of 1980 to approximately 600 students each year. Most of these students have had little or no prior formal training in computation, although most have played with computers a bit and a few have had extensive programming or hardware design experience. Our design of this introductory Computer Science subject reflects two major concerns. First we want to establish the idea that a computer language is not just a way of getting a computer to perform operations, but rather that it is a novel formal medium for expressing ideas about methodology. Thus, programs must be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute. Secondly, we believe that the essential material to be addressed by a subject at this level, is not the syntax of particular programming language constructs, nor clever algorithms for computing particular functions of efficiently, not even the mathematical analysis of algorithms and the foundations of computing, but rather the techniques used to control the intellectual complexity of large software systems.