Ontologies can be learned from various sources, be it databases, structured and unstructured (Web) documents or even existing preliminaries such as dictionaries and taxonomies. In addition, the distributed nature of ontology development has led to a large number of different ontologies covering the same or overlapping domains therefore the research community should deal with issues such as ontology mapping and merging too. This topic is addressed by the cognitive science community by means of language learning simulation. The problem of ontology learning overlaps with the one of language learning: both of them address the issues of learning from text, learning of concepts and taxonomies. Ontology mapping can be viewed also as a language learning process since it defines in fact a common vocabulary derived from the previous non-mapped vocabularies. Our proposal is to investigate the potential of an agent-based discrete event simulation framework to perform simulations resulting in language learning and evolution and consequently offering other solutions to the ontology learning and mapping problems and/or evaluating others solutions.
Individual learning is the knowledge acquired in every situation in which an
agent reacts and processes data, including its beliefs about its actions in order to
improve the performance in similar situations in the future. Such process aims
to align the agent beliefs to the objective real world. Usually, in the initial state,
the agents will have no common lexicon and therefore no understanding of what
other agents say to them. The expectation is, that the agents will develop in
time a shared vocabulary and ultimately a shared ontology (see [
A comprehensive classification of ontology learning approaches and tools
before 2000 can be found in [
In the last ten years many researchers developed methodologies and tools for
ontology mapping and ontology merging, critical operations for information
exchange on the Semantic Web. A proposal for ontology mapping was introduced
in 2004 ([
AOR Simulation provides an agent-based discrete event simulation framework
(http://aor-simulation.org) based on a high-level rule-based simulation
language (AORSL) and an abstract simulator architecture and execution model
with a reference Java implementation. Its main concepts have been proposed in
[
A simulation scenario is expressed in the AOR Simulation Language (AORSL) and then Java source code is generated, compiled to Java byte code and finally executed. It consists of a simulation model, an initial state of the world and possibly view definitions. The simulation model consists of: (1) an optional space model (needed for physical objects/agents visualization); (2) a set of entity types, including event types, messages, objects and agent types; (3) a set of environment rules, which define causality laws governing the environment state changes. A simulation can use various space models characterized by: (i) dimension (1D, 2D or 3D); (ii) discrete/continuous and (iii) geometry (Euclidean or Toroidal).
An agent type is defined by means of: (1) a set of (objective) properties; (2) a set of (subjective) self-belief properties; (3) a set of (subjective) belief entity types; (4) a set of agent rules, which define the agent’s reactive behavior in response to events and (5) an optional set of communication rules defining the agent-to-agent communication capabilities. Agent beliefs might be defined as knowledge of the entity about it self and/or about the external world: objects, events or other agents. Therefore an agent may have two types of beliefs (Figure 1): (1) self beliefs properties - knowledge of the agent about it self; (2) belief entities - knowledge of the agent about other agents, objects or events related to its world during a simulation. The upper level ontological categories of AOR Simulation are messages, events and objects. Objects include agents, physical objects and physical agents.
The ontology of event types (see Figure 2): (a) environment events types (including exogenous events types, perception event types and action event types), and (b) internal events (such as actual perception event types and periodic event types) has been proven to be fundamental in AOR Simulation. Internal events are those events that happen ”in the mind ” of the agent. For modeling distorted perceptions, both a perception event type and the corresponding actual perception event type can be defined and related with each other via actual perception mapping rules. Both the behavior of the environment (its causality laws) and the behavior of agents are modeled with the help of rules, thus supporting high-level declarative behavior modeling.
AOR Simulation supports the distinction between facts and beliefs, including self-beliefs (the agent’s beliefs about itself). 3
The typical AOR scenario for ontology learning and merging/mapping consists
in a number of agent types, each of them having their own vocabulary about the
real world. The agents interactions are the only way to communicate knowledge.
A potential solution requires achievements on the following research questions:
1. AOR agents must be equipped with individual learning capabilities.
However, there are several ways of implementing learning capabilities. Which learning
capabilities should offer AOR? Can we use just the machine learning community
achievements as they are or specific solutions have to be considered? Looks like
the standard individual learning can be implemented through Reinforcement
Learning (RL), [
2. Is the agent memory necessary? Is this related just to the remembering of the agents previous actions or it may be necessary a memory of its past beliefs too? From the learning perspective, the agent needs a memory of its last experience for every action, where experience means a positive reward, negative reward or failed action. It, may need to remember all the perception events and messages that were present at the time step of that last experience. This enables agents to learn new mappings between state and actions by comparing previous experiences.
3. What kind of reasoning capabilities are necessary for the agent? Evolutionary learning and individual learning should both be performed by the agent reasoner. Hence, an agent can be created with a specific reasoner but change it during its lifetime by performing lifetime learning. 4
We have argued that the problem of merging ontologies by discovering ontology mappings might be also addressed by using an agent-based simulation based on existing literature, theories of learning, our experience, and an observational case study. In this position paper we developed a number of research questions that need to be investigated towards using cognitive science techniques to perform ontology learning and merging. The simulation results can be used by ontology engineers in the manual process of ontology learning/merging/refining or might be integrated in other tools for semi-automatic processing. From the main problem perspective, we see that the automated ontology learning/merging is a complex task. Based on our investigation, the problems users experience go beyond the processing of the algorithms. Users have to keep in mind what they have looked at and executed, to understand output from different algorithms, to be able to reverse their decisions, and to gather evidence to support their decisions. We believe that all these problems have to be addressed in an agent-based simulation and they constitute key assets for a successful solution.
We look towards other researchers feedback including ones which are interested to join our initiative.