• Home
  • Search
  • Knowledge representation systems syntactic methods
  • Cite Icon1
  • https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-19402-9_79Copy DOI Icon

Knowledge representation systems syntactic methods

  • Jan 1, 1988
  • Anita Wasilewska
Show More
  • Abstract
  • Literature Map
  • References
  • Citations
  • Similar Papers
Abstract

Reasoning about knowledge and knowledge representation has been an issue of concern in Artificial Intelligence for over two decades. More recently, researchers have realized that these issues also play a crucial role in other subfields of computer science, including cryptography, distributed computation, data base theory, and expert systems.Any knowledge representation system provides information, usually incomplete, about some parts of perceivable reality, and different authors provide different formal models for the knowledge analysis.Recently, the notion of rough sets [Pawlak 1982] was introduced, which provides a systematic framework for the study of the problems arising from inprecise and insufficient knowledge.A rough set, like fuzzy set, is a matematical model used to deal with approximate classification. These concepts have been proved to be independent of one another [Pawlak 1985(2)].A number of experimental systems has been implemented based on the deterministic rough-set theory. These applications include analysis of medical data of patients with dudendal ulcer [Fibak 1986], control algorithm aquisition in the process of kiln production [Mrózek 1985],linguistic pattern recognition [Wojcik 1986], and approximate reasoning [Rasiowa 1987].A natural, probabilistic extention of the rough-set model has been proven to be useful mathematical tool for dealing with some problems occuring in machine learning like generation of decision rules from inconsistent training examples [Wong 1986(1)] or database design [Yasdi 1987].The problem of teaching a student by several imperfect teachers ([Pettorossi,Raś, Zemankova 1987], [Raś, Zemankova 1986]) is handled also within rough-set framework. The authors deal with the case when the teacher and the student understand each other only partially and define a formal system which provides the basis for writing procedures which generate rules of a knowledge base.The model used in all these investigations assume that in the process of perception one distinguishes entities (objects) and their properties. Properties of objects are perceived through assignment of some characteristics (attributes) and their values of the objects. In this way a universe of discourse (a problem domain) consisting of objects and elementary information items providing characterization of these objects in terms of attributes and attributes values is established. In general, information about objects obtained in this way is not sufficient to characterize objects uniquely; that is, it is not possible to distinguish all the objects by means of the admitted attributes and their values. This means that objects are recognized up to indiscernibility relation determined by elementary information items. Any two objects are indiscernible whehever they assume the same values for all the attributes under consideration.Next we form concepts; that is, we agregate some objects into sets. Information about a concept is composed from information about objects which are instances of concepts. Since objects are not necessarily distinguishable, information characterizing a concept may be ambigous to some extent. In this case we want to have at least some approximation of our information and we express it in terms of rough sets.All cited above approaches use purely semantical methods in their investigations, exept [Pettorossi,Raś, Zemankova 1987], [Raś, Zemankova 1986] where mixed semantical and syntactical (formal system) methods are used.In our paper we focus on purely syntactical methods and problems which can be solved by them. One of the problems is a problem of static learning as defined in [Pawlak 1985(1)].Its main idea is as follows. Suppose now that we are given a finite subset U of the set of objects O B. Elements of U will be called training examples and O B is called a training set.Assume futher that O B is classified into non-empty, disjoint subsets O 1, O 2, ..., O n , (n>2) by a teacher (or expert). The classification represents teacher's knowledge of objects from O B.Let's now assume that there is another person, a student, who is able to characterize each object from O B in terms of attributes from a set A. Description of objects in terms of attributes from A represents student's knowledge of objects from O B.Now we want to know if it is possible to describe the classification O 1, O 2, ..., O n provided by the teacher in terms of attributes from A, or more exactly, to find a classification algorithm which provides teacher's classification on the basis of properties of objects expressed in terms of attributes defined in the student's system S.We give here a purely syntactical, easy programable method to do so. The method consists of two procedures. First procedure, lets call it Procedure one generates, for a given term of a standard term language for a given system, its equivalent normal form.The next procedure, called Procedure Two will verify the correctness of proper decision algorithm.

Similar Papers
  • Book Chapter

Soft Rough Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets

  • Jan 01, 2015
  • Anjan Mukherjee
  • Research Article
  • Citations72

The further investigation of covering-based rough sets: Uncertainty characterization, similarity measure and generalized models

  • Jun 22, 2010
  • Information Sciences
  • Zhanhong Shi +1
  • Research Article
  • Citations140

Soft rough fuzzy sets and soft fuzzy rough sets

  • Nov 06, 2011
  • Computers & Mathematics with Applications
  • Dan Meng +2
  • Research Article

Covering Based Pessimistic Multigranular Approximate Rough Equalities and Their Properties

  • Jan 01, 2018
  • International Journal of Rough Sets and Data Analysis
  • Balakrushna Tripathy +1
  • Book Chapter
  • Citations28

A Hybrid Classifier Based on Rough Set Theory and Support Vector Machines

  • Jan 01, 2005
  • Gexiang Zhang +2
  • Research Article

Application of Soft Computing Techniques Rough Set Theory and Formal Concept Analysis for analysing Investment Decisions in Gold-ETF

  • Jan 01, 2020
  • International Journal of Applied Management Science
  • Subhashree Natarajan +1
  • Book Chapter
  • Citations22

Developing a Team Performance Prediction Model: A Rough Sets Approach

  • Jan 01, 2011
  • Mazni Omar +2
  • Research Article
  • Citations47

A new fuzzy multi-attribute group decision-making method with generalized maximal consistent block and its application in emergency management

  • Jan 15, 2021
  • Knowledge-Based Systems
  • Yan Sun +3
  • Research Article
  • Citations84

Quantitative rough sets based on subsethood measures

  • Feb 01, 2014
  • Information Sciences
  • Yiyu Yao +1
  • Research Article
  • Citations37

Perception and Classification. A Note on Near Sets and Rough Sets

  • Jan 01, 2010
  • Fundamenta Informaticae
  • Marcin Wolski
  • Research Article
  • Citations62

An incremental approach to attribute reduction from dynamic incomplete decision systems in rough set theory

  • Jul 02, 2015
  • Data & Knowledge Engineering
  • Wenhao Shu +1
  • Research Article
  • Citations100

Axiomatic systems for rough sets and fuzzy rough sets

  • Feb 21, 2008
  • International Journal of Approximate Reasoning
  • Guilong Liu
  • Conference Article

An attempt of reconstruction of object-oriented rough set models

  • Nov 01, 2011
  • Yasuo Kudo +2
  • Research Article
  • Citations22

Optimal approximations with Rough Sets and similarities in measure spaces

  • Jan 06, 2016
  • International Journal of Approximate Reasoning
  • Ryszard Janicki +1
  • Research Article
  • Citations8

Representations of L-fuzzy rough approximation operators

  • Jun 15, 2023
  • Information Sciences
  • Yan Sun +1
Cactus Communications logo

Copyright 2026 Cactus Communications. All rights reserved.