User Manual Privacy Policy Disclaimer Contact us
  Advanced SearchBrowse




Conference Paper

Do we need the closed-world assumption in knowledge representation?


Hustadt,  Ullrich
Programming Logics, MPI for Informatics, Max Planck Society;

External Ressource
No external resources are shared
Fulltext (public)
There are no public fulltexts stored in PuRe
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available

Hustadt, U. (1994). Do we need the closed-world assumption in knowledge representation? In F. Baader, M. Buchheit, M. A. Jeusfeld, & W. Nutt (Eds.), Working Notes of the KI'94 Workshop: Reasoning about Structured Objects: Knowledge Representation meets Databases (KRDB'94) (pp. 24-26). Saarbrücken, Germany: DFKI.

Cite as: http://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0014-AD75-4
In this paper I want to focus on some principal differences between data models of database systems and knowledge representation languages. The data manipulation languages of data models are based on the closed-world, unique-name, and domain-closure assumption. Data manipulation languages and query languages of knowledge representation formalisms differ considerably in their underlying assumptions. They are based on the open-world, unique-name, and open-domain assumption. That means, that even if the data definition language and the data manipulation language of a database management system and a knowledge base management system would coincide, the results of data manipulations would differ. I present some examples that show the usefulness of closed-world inferences in natural language processing. Thus knowledge representation languages sticking to the open-world assumption seem to be insufficient for natural language processing.