Building a Hierarchical, Granular Knowledge Cube

A knowledge base stores facts and rules about the world that applications can use for the purpose of reasoning. By applying the concept of granular computing to a knowledge base, several advantages emerge. These can be harnessed by applications to improve their capabilities and performance. In this paper, the concept behind such a construct, called a granular knowledge cube, is defined, and its intended use as an instrument that manages to cope with different data types and detect knowledge domains is elaborated. Furthermore, the underlying architecture, consisting of the three layers of the storing, representing, and structuring of knowledge, is described. Finally, benefits as well as challenges of deploying it are listed alongside application types that could profit from having such an enhanced knowledge base.

Authors:

• Alexander Denzler
• Marcel Wehrle
• Andreas Meier

Keywords:

• Granular computing
• granular knowledge
• hierarchical structuring
• knowledge bases.

References:

[1] E. Achtert, C. Böhm, H-P. Kriegel, P. Krüger, I. Müller-Gorman,
A. Zimek, Finding Hierarchies of Subspace Clustering, Proc. 10th Europ.
Conf. on Principles and Practice of Knowledge Discovery in Databases
(PKDD), Germany, pp. 446-453, 2008.
[2] C.C. Aggarwal, A. Hinneburg, D.A. Keim, On the Surprising Behavior
of Distance Metrics in High Dimensional Space, In: Lecture Notes in
Computer Science, Volume 1973, pp 420-434, 2001
[3] R. Angles, C. Gutierrez, Survey of graph databases, ACM Computing
Surveys (CSUR) Volume 40, Issue 1, Article 1, pp.1-39, 2008.
[4] D.P. Ausubel, J. Novak, H. Hanesian,Educational Psychology: A
Cognitive View, 2nd Edition, Rinehart & Winston, New York, pp.
251-257, 1978.
[5] A. Chan, E. Pampalk, Growing hierarchical self organizing map
(GHSOM) toolbox: visualizations and enhancements, In: Neural
Information Processing, 2002. ICONIP ’02. Proceedings of the 9th
International Conference, Volume 5, pp. 2537-2541, 2002
[6] A.M. Collins, M.R. Quillian, Retrieval time from semantic memory,
Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, volume 8, pp. 240-248,
(1969).
[7] X.L. Dong, E. Gabrilovich, G. Heitz, W. Horn, N. Lao, K. Murphy,
T. Strohmann, S. Sun, W. Zhang, Knowledge Vault: A Web-Scale
Approach to Probabilistic Knowledge Fusion, In: Proceedings of the 20th
ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and
data mining, pp. 601-610, 2014.
[8] J. Hey, The Data, Information, Knowledge, Wisdom Chain: The
Metaphorical Link, pp. 4-8, 2004.
[9] S. Jouili, V. Vansteenberghe, An Empirical comparison of graph
databases, IEEE, Social Computing (SOcialCom), pp. 708-715, 2013.
[10] J. Lampinen, E. Oja, Clustering Properties of Hierarchical
Self-Organizing Maps,Journal of Mathematical Imaging and Vision,
pp.261-272, 1992. [11] H. Liu, H. Motoda, Feature Extraction, Construction and Selection: A
Data Mining Perspective, Kluwer Academic Group, USA, 1998.
[12] M. Minsky: A Framework for Representing Knowledge, MIT-AI
Laboratory Memo 306, 1974.
[13] M. Minsky, The Emotion Machine: Commonsense Thinking, Artificial
Intelligence, and the Future of the Human Mind, Simon & Schuster, Inc.,
2006.
[14] G. Palla, I. Derényi, I. Farkas, T. Vicsek, Uncovering the overlapping
community structure of complex networks in nature and society, Nature
435, pp. 814-818, 2005.
[15] S. Puri, A Fuzzy Similarity Based Concept Mining Model for Text
Classification, International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and
Applications, Vol. 2, No. 11, 2011.
[16] R. A. Quilian, A notation for representing conceptual information: An
application to semantics and mechanical English paraphrasing, SP-1395,
System Development Corporation, Santa Monica, 1963.
[17] M.R. Quilian, Semantic memory, In: Semantic Information Processing
(Ed. M. Minsky), Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 227-270, 1975.
[18] A-B. M. Salem, M. Alfonse, Ontology versus Semantic Networks
for Medical Knowledge Representation, 12th WSEAS International
Conference on Computers, pp.768-774, 2008.
[19] U. Sattler, D. Calvanese, R. Molitor, Relationships with other
formalisms, Description of logic handbook, pp. 137-177, 2003.
[20] B. Shao, H. Wang, Y. Xiao, Managing and mining large graphs:
Systems and implementations, in proceedings of the 2012 ACM SIGMOD
International Conference on Management of Data, SIGMOD 12, pp.
589-592, New York, USA, 2012.
[21] J. F. Sowa, Conceptual Graphs for a Data Base Interface, IBM Journal
of Research and Development 20 (4), pp. 336-357, 1976.
[22] G Weikum, M. Theobald, From information to knowledge: harvesting
entities and relationships from web sources, In: Proceedings of
the twenty-ninth ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGART symposium on
Principles of database systems, ACM, pp. 65-76, 2010.
[23] W. Wu, H. Li, H. Wang, K.Q. Zhu. Probase: A probabilistic taxonomy
for text understanding, SIGMOD, ACM, pp. 481-492, 2012.
[24] W3C, OWL Web Ontology Language Overview, 2004.
[25] W3C, Resource Description Framework (RDF) Schema, 1998.
[26] Y.Y. Yao, B. Zhou, A logic language of granular computing, Proceedings
of the 6th IEEE International Conference on Cognitive Informatics, IEEE
Press, pp. 178-185, 2007.
[27] Y.Y. Yao, The Art of granular computing, Proceedings of the
International Conference on Rough Sets and Emerging Intelligent Systems
Paradigms, LNAI 4585, Springer, pp. 101-112, 2007.
[28] L. Zadeh, Towards a theory of fuzzy information granulation and its
centrality in human reasoning and fuzzy logic, Fuzzy Sets and Systems,
Volume 19, pp. 111-127, 1997.