towards ideal semantics for analyzing stream reasoning
play

Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning Harald Beck - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Oct 19, 2023 •142 likes •1.76k views

Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning Harald Beck Minh Dao-Tran Thomas Eiter Michael Fink International Workshop on Reactive Concepts in Knowledge Representation 2014 August 19, 2014 Scope & Motivation Windows &

  1. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Example: Trams and buses Arrival times at different stations p i bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) ◮ Normal DB: Query for trams and buses arriving at same station P Answer: i 1 , i 2 , p 1 and i 3 , i 4 , p 2 ◮ SQL SELECT * FROM tram, bus WHERE tram.P = bus.P H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 2 / 15

  2. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Example: Trams and buses Arrival times at different stations p i bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Stream setting, at time 13: Query for H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 2 / 15

  3. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Example: Trams and buses Arrival times at different stations p i bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Stream setting, at time 13: Query for ◮ Trams and buses arriving at same station P H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 2 / 15

  4. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Example: Trams and buses Arrival times at different stations p i bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Stream setting, at time 13: Query for ◮ Trams and buses arriving at same station P within the last 5 min H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 2 / 15

  5. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Example: Trams and buses Arrival times at different stations p i bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Stream setting, at time 13: Query for ◮ Trams and buses arriving at same station P within the last 5 min Answer: i 3 , i 4 , p 2 H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 2 / 15

  6. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Example: Trams and buses Arrival times at different stations p i bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Stream setting, at time 13: Query for ◮ Trams and buses arriving at same station P within the last 5 min Answer: i 3 , i 4 , p 2 ◮ CQL SELECT * FROM tram [RANGE 5], bus [RANGE 5] WHERE tram.P = bus.P H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 2 / 15

  7. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Example: Trams and buses Arrival times at different stations p i bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Trams and buses arriving at same station P within the last 5 min at the same time H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 2 / 15

  8. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Example: Trams and buses Arrival times at different stations p i bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Trams and buses arriving at same station P within the last 5 min at the same time Answer: – H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 2 / 15

  9. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Example: Trams and buses Arrival times at different stations p i bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) 0 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 11 13 ◮ Trams and buses arriving at same station P within the last 5 min at the same time Answer: i 1 , i 2 , p 1 for query times 2 , . . . , 7 H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 2 / 15

  10. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Example: Trams and buses Arrival times at different stations p i bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Trams and buses arriving at same station P within the last 5 min at the same time Answer: i 1 , i 2 , p 1 for query times 2 , . . . , 7 ◮ CQL: Not expressible in single query (Snapshot semantics) SELECT * AS tram bus FROM tram [NOW], bus [NOW] WHERE tram.P = bus.P H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 2 / 15

  11. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Example: Trams and buses Arrival times at different stations p i bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Trams and buses arriving at same station P within the last 5 min at the same time Answer: i 1 , i 2 , p 1 for query times 2 , . . . , 7 ◮ CQL: Not expressible in single query (Snapshot semantics) SELECT * AS tram bus FROM tram [NOW], bus [NOW] WHERE tram.P = bus.P H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 2 / 15

  12. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Example: Trams and buses Arrival times at different stations p i bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Trams and buses arriving at same station P within the last 5 min at the same time Answer: i 1 , i 2 , p 1 for query times 2 , . . . , 7 ◮ CQL: Not expressible in single query (Snapshot semantics) SELECT * AS tram bus FROM tram [NOW], bus [NOW] WHERE tram.P = bus.P SELECT * FROM tram bus [RANGE 5] H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 2 / 15

  13. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Example: Trams and buses Arrival times at different stations p i bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Trams and buses arriving at same station P within the last 5 min at the same time Answer: i 1 , i 2 , p 1 for query times 2 , . . . , 7 ◮ CQL: Not expressible in single query (Snapshot semantics) SELECT * AS tram bus FROM tram [NOW], bus [NOW] WHERE tram.P = bus.P SELECT * FROM tram bus [RANGE 5] H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 2 / 15

  14. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Window Types bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Time-based H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 3 / 15

  15. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Window Types bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Time-based ◮ Tuple-based H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 3 / 15

  16. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Window Types bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Time-based ◮ Tuple-based ◮ Not necessarily unique. E.g.: Last 3 tuples H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 3 / 15

  17. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Window Types bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Time-based ◮ Tuple-based ◮ Not necessarily unique. E.g.: Last 3 tuples H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 3 / 15

  18. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Window Types bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Time-based ◮ Tuple-based ◮ Not necessarily unique. E.g.: Last 3 tuples ◮ Partition-based H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 3 / 15

  19. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Window Types bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Time-based ◮ Tuple-based ◮ Not necessarily unique. E.g.: Last 3 tuples ◮ Partition-based ◮ Apply tuple-based window on substreams H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 3 / 15

  20. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Ideas for Windows ◮ Example: “In the last hour, did a bus always arrive within 5 min?” H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 4 / 15

  21. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Ideas for Windows ◮ Example: “In the last hour, did a bus always arrive within 5 min?” H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 4 / 15

  22. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Ideas for Windows ◮ Example: “In the last hour, did a bus always arrive within 5 min?” ◮ Allow for nesting: windows within windows ◮ As formal counterpart to repeated runs of continuous queries H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 4 / 15

  23. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Ideas for Windows ◮ Example: “In the last hour, did a bus always arrive within 5 min?” ◮ Allow for nesting: windows within windows ◮ As formal counterpart to repeated runs of continuous queries ◮ Allow for looking into the future H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 4 / 15

  24. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Ideas for Windows ◮ Example: “In the last hour, did a bus always arrive within 5 min?” ◮ Allow for nesting: windows within windows ◮ As formal counterpart to repeated runs of continuous queries ◮ Allow for looking into the future ◮ View window operators as first class citizens ◮ Do not separate window application (first) from logic (then) H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 4 / 15

  25. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Ideas for Windows ◮ Example: “In the last hour, did a bus always arrive within 5 min?” ◮ Allow for nesting: windows within windows ◮ As formal counterpart to repeated runs of continuous queries ◮ Allow for looking into the future ◮ View window operators as first class citizens ◮ Do not separate window application (first) from logic (then) ◮ Leave open specific underlying window functions H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 4 / 15

  26. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Ideas for Windows ◮ Example: “In the last hour, did a bus always arrive within 5 min?” ◮ Allow for nesting: windows within windows ◮ As formal counterpart to repeated runs of continuous queries ◮ Allow for looking into the future ◮ View window operators as first class citizens ◮ Do not separate window application (first) from logic (then) ◮ Leave open specific underlying window functions ◮ w ( S , t ) �→ S ′ ◮ Stream S , time point t ∈ N , new stream S ′ H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 4 / 15

  27. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Ideas for Time Reference ◮ Atoms a appearing in the stream at time points 1 , 2 , 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 a a a H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 5 / 15

  28. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Ideas for Time Reference ◮ Atoms a appearing in the stream at time points 1 , 2 , 5 ◮ Query time t = 4 . 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 • a a a H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 5 / 15

  29. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Ideas for Time Reference ◮ Atoms a appearing in the stream at time points 1 , 2 , 5 ◮ Query time t = 4 . Window on interval [ 1 , 4 ] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 • a a a H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 5 / 15

  30. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Ideas for Time Reference ◮ Atoms a appearing in the stream at time points 1 , 2 , 5 ◮ Query time t = 4 . Window on interval [ 1 , 4 ] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 • a a a ◮ Example queries: In this window, does a hold. . . H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 5 / 15

  31. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Ideas for Time Reference ◮ Atoms a appearing in the stream at time points 1 , 2 , 5 ◮ Query time t = 4 . Window on interval [ 1 , 4 ] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 • a a a ◮ Example queries: In this window, does a hold. . . . . . now, i.e., exactly at t ? H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 5 / 15

  32. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Ideas for Time Reference ◮ Atoms a appearing in the stream at time points 1 , 2 , 5 ◮ Query time t = 4 . Window on interval [ 1 , 4 ] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 • a a a ◮ Example queries: In this window, does a hold. . . . . . now, i.e., exactly at t ? a H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 5 / 15

  33. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Ideas for Time Reference ◮ Atoms a appearing in the stream at time points 1 , 2 , 5 ◮ Query time t = 4 . Window on interval [ 1 , 4 ] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 • a a a ◮ Example queries: In this window, does a hold. . . . . . now, i.e., exactly at t ? a no H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 5 / 15

  34. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Ideas for Time Reference ◮ Atoms a appearing in the stream at time points 1 , 2 , 5 ◮ Query time t = 4 . Window on interval [ 1 , 4 ] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 • a a a ◮ Example queries: In this window, does a hold. . . . . . now, i.e., exactly at t ? a no . . . at time point 2 ? H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 5 / 15

  35. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Ideas for Time Reference ◮ Atoms a appearing in the stream at time points 1 , 2 , 5 ◮ Query time t = 4 . Window on interval [ 1 , 4 ] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 • a a a ◮ Example queries: In this window, does a hold. . . . . . now, i.e., exactly at t ? a no . . . at time point 2 ? @ 2 a H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 5 / 15

  36. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Ideas for Time Reference ◮ Atoms a appearing in the stream at time points 1 , 2 , 5 ◮ Query time t = 4 . Window on interval [ 1 , 4 ] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 • a a a ◮ Example queries: In this window, does a hold. . . . . . now, i.e., exactly at t ? a no . . . at time point 2 ? @ 2 a yes H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 5 / 15

  37. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Ideas for Time Reference ◮ Atoms a appearing in the stream at time points 1 , 2 , 5 ◮ Query time t = 4 . Window on interval [ 1 , 4 ] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 • a a a ◮ Example queries: In this window, does a hold. . . . . . now, i.e., exactly at t ? a no . . . at time point 2 ? @ 2 a yes . . . at some time point t ′ ? H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 5 / 15

  38. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Ideas for Time Reference ◮ Atoms a appearing in the stream at time points 1 , 2 , 5 ◮ Query time t = 4 . Window on interval [ 1 , 4 ] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 • a a a ◮ Example queries: In this window, does a hold. . . . . . now, i.e., exactly at t ? a no . . . at time point 2 ? @ 2 a yes . . . at some time point t ′ ? ♦ a H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 5 / 15

  39. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Ideas for Time Reference ◮ Atoms a appearing in the stream at time points 1 , 2 , 5 ◮ Query time t = 4 . Window on interval [ 1 , 4 ] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 • a a a ◮ Example queries: In this window, does a hold. . . . . . now, i.e., exactly at t ? a no . . . at time point 2 ? @ 2 a yes . . . at some time point t ′ ? ♦ a yes H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 5 / 15

  40. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Ideas for Time Reference ◮ Atoms a appearing in the stream at time points 1 , 2 , 5 ◮ Query time t = 4 . Window on interval [ 1 , 4 ] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 • a a a ◮ Example queries: In this window, does a hold. . . . . . now, i.e., exactly at t ? a no . . . at time point 2 ? @ 2 a yes . . . at some time point t ′ ? ♦ a yes . . . at all time points t ′ ? H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 5 / 15

  41. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Ideas for Time Reference ◮ Atoms a appearing in the stream at time points 1 , 2 , 5 ◮ Query time t = 4 . Window on interval [ 1 , 4 ] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 • a a a ◮ Example queries: In this window, does a hold. . . . . . now, i.e., exactly at t ? a no . . . at time point 2 ? @ 2 a yes . . . at some time point t ′ ? ♦ a yes . . . at all time points t ′ ? � a H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 5 / 15

  42. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Ideas for Time Reference ◮ Atoms a appearing in the stream at time points 1 , 2 , 5 ◮ Query time t = 4 . Window on interval [ 1 , 4 ] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 • a a a ◮ Example queries: In this window, does a hold. . . . . . now, i.e., exactly at t ? a no . . . at time point 2 ? @ 2 a yes . . . at some time point t ′ ? ♦ a yes . . . at all time points t ′ ? � a no H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 5 / 15

  43. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Ideas for Time Reference ◮ Atoms a appearing in the stream at time points 1 , 2 , 5 ◮ Query time t = 4 . Window on interval [ 1 , 4 ] 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 • a a a ◮ Example queries: In this window, does a hold. . . . . . now, i.e., exactly at t ? a no . . . at time point 2 ? @ 2 a yes . . . at some time point t ′ ? ♦ a yes . . . at all time points t ′ ? � a no H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 5 / 15

  44. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Streams bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Stream S = ( T , υ ) , where H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 6 / 15

  45. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Streams bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Stream S = ( T , υ ) , where ◮ T : interval in N H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 6 / 15

  46. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Streams bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Stream S = ( T , υ ) , where ◮ T : interval in N ◮ υ : T → 2 G (interpretation of ground atoms G ) H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 6 / 15

  47. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Streams bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Stream S = ( T , υ ) , where ◮ T : interval in N ◮ υ : T → 2 G (interpretation of ground atoms G ) ◮ Example H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 6 / 15

  48. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Streams bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Stream S = ( T , υ ) , where ◮ T : interval in N ◮ υ : T → 2 G (interpretation of ground atoms G ) ◮ Example ◮ T = [ 0 , 13 ] H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 6 / 15

  49. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Streams bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Stream S = ( T , υ ) , where ◮ T : interval in N ◮ υ : T → 2 G (interpretation of ground atoms G ) ◮ Example ◮ T = [ 0 , 13 ] � 2 �→ { tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) , bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) } � ◮ υ = H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 6 / 15

  50. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Streams bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Stream S = ( T , υ ) , where ◮ T : interval in N ◮ υ : T → 2 G (interpretation of ground atoms G ) ◮ Example ◮ T = [ 0 , 13 ] � 2 �→ { tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) , bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) } , 8 �→ { tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) } � ◮ υ = H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 6 / 15

  51. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Streams bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Stream S = ( T , υ ) , where ◮ T : interval in N ◮ υ : T → 2 G (interpretation of ground atoms G ) ◮ Example ◮ T = [ 0 , 13 ] � 2 �→ { tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) , bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) } , 8 �→ { tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) } , � ◮ υ = 11 �→ { bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) } H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 6 / 15

  52. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Streams bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Stream S = ( T , υ ) , where ◮ T : interval in N ◮ υ : T → 2 G (interpretation of ground atoms G ) ◮ Example ◮ T = [ 0 , 13 ] � 2 �→ { tram ( i 1 , p 1 ) , bus ( i 2 , p 1 ) } , 8 �→ { tram ( i 3 , p 2 ) } , � ◮ υ = 11 �→ { bus ( i 4 , p 2 ) } , i �→ ∅ else H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 6 / 15

  53. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Formulas ◮ Formulas defined by the grammar (atom a , t ∈ N timepoint) α ::= H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 7 / 15

  54. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Formulas ◮ Formulas defined by the grammar (atom a , t ∈ N timepoint) α ::= a | ¬ α | α ∧ α | α ∨ α | α → α H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 7 / 15

  55. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Formulas ◮ Formulas defined by the grammar (atom a , t ∈ N timepoint) α ::= a | ¬ α | α ∧ α | α ∨ α | α → α | ♦ α | � α | @ t α H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 7 / 15

  56. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Formulas ◮ Formulas defined by the grammar (atom a , t ∈ N timepoint) α ::= a | ¬ α | α ∧ α | α ∨ α | α → α | ♦ α | � α | @ t α | ⊞ i α ◮ ⊞ i window operator: change view on stream H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 7 / 15

  57. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Formulas ◮ Formulas defined by the grammar (atom a , t ∈ N timepoint) α ::= a | ¬ α | α ∧ α | α ∨ α | α → α | ♦ α | � α | @ t α | ⊞ i α ◮ ⊞ i window operator: change view on stream ◮ Utilizing window function with identifier i H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 7 / 15

  58. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Formulas ◮ Formulas defined by the grammar (atom a , t ∈ N timepoint) α ::= a | ¬ α | α ∧ α | α ∨ α | α → α | ♦ α | � α | @ t α | ⊞ i α ◮ ⊞ i window operator: change view on stream ◮ Utilizing window function with identifier i ◮ Change considered substream based on current time point, and ◮ current window, or ◮ original stream H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 7 / 15

  59. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Formulas ◮ Formulas defined by the grammar (atom a , t ∈ N timepoint) α ::= a | ¬ α | α ∧ α | α ∨ α | α → α | ♦ α | � α | @ t α | ⊞ i α ◮ ⊞ i window operator: change view on stream ◮ Utilizing window function with identifier i ◮ Change considered substream based on current time point, and ◮ current window, or ◮ original stream ◮ Window operator = window function + stream choice function H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 7 / 15

  60. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Formulas ◮ Formulas defined by the grammar (atom a , t ∈ N timepoint) α ::= a | ¬ α | α ∧ α | α ∨ α | α → α | ♦ α | � α | @ t α | ⊞ i α ◮ ⊞ i window operator: change view on stream ◮ Utilizing window function with identifier i ◮ Change considered substream based on current time point, and ◮ current window, or ◮ original stream ◮ Window operator = window function + stream choice function ◮ Why keep the original stream? H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 7 / 15

  61. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Nested Windows and Stream Choice ◮ “For the last two trams, did a bus always appear within 5 min?” bus tram tram bus 0 2 8 11 13 H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 8 / 15

  62. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Nested Windows and Stream Choice ◮ “For the last two trams, did a bus always appear within 5 min?” bus tram tram bus 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Partition-based window H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 8 / 15

  63. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Nested Windows and Stream Choice ◮ “For the last two trams, did a bus always appear within 5 min?” bus tram tram bus 0 2 8 11 13 ◮ Partition-based window ◮ Partition stream into substreams: trams vs. buses H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 8 / 15

  64. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Nested Windows and Stream Choice ◮ “For the last two trams, did a bus always appear within 5 min?” tram tram 2 8 13 ◮ Partition-based window ◮ Partition stream into substreams: trams vs. buses ◮ Apply tuple-based windows on substreams: 2 trams, 0 buses H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 8 / 15

  65. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Nested Windows and Stream Choice ◮ “For the last two trams, did a bus always appear within 5 min?” tram tram 2 8 13 ◮ Partition-based window ◮ Partition stream into substreams: trams vs. buses ◮ Apply tuple-based windows on substreams: 2 trams, 0 buses ◮ In the new view, buses are invisible H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 8 / 15

  66. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Nested Windows and Stream Choice ◮ “For the last two trams, did a bus always appear within 5 min?” tram tram 2 7 8 13 ◮ Partition-based window ◮ Partition stream into substreams: trams vs. buses ◮ Apply tuple-based windows on substreams: 2 trams, 0 buses ◮ In the new view, buses are invisible ◮ ⇒ For “within 5 min” window: use data of original stream again H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 8 / 15

  67. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Nested Windows and Stream Choice ◮ “For the last two trams, did a bus always appear within 5 min?” bus tram tram bus 2 7 8 11 13 ◮ Partition-based window ◮ Partition stream into substreams: trams vs. buses ◮ Apply tuple-based windows on substreams: 2 trams, 0 buses ◮ In the new view, buses are invisible ◮ ⇒ For “within 5 min” window: use data of original stream again H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 8 / 15

  68. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Semantics: Structure ◮ Structure M = � T , υ, ˆ W � , where H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 9 / 15

  69. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Semantics: Structure ◮ Structure M = � T , υ, ˆ W � , where ◮ ( T , υ ) original stream H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 9 / 15

  70. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Semantics: Structure ◮ Structure M = � T , υ, ˆ W � , where ◮ ( T , υ ) original stream ◮ ˆ W mapping from idenfiers (in N ) to extended window functions H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 9 / 15

  71. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Semantics: Structure ◮ Structure M = � T , υ, ˆ W � , where ◮ ( T , υ ) original stream ◮ ˆ W mapping from idenfiers (in N ) to extended window functions ◮ choice function ch ( S 1 , S 2 ) �→ S ′ w ( S 1 , S 2 , t ) = w ( ch ( S 1 , S 2 ) , t ) ˆ H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 9 / 15

  72. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Semantics: Structure ◮ Structure M = � T , υ, ˆ W � , where ◮ ( T , υ ) original stream ◮ ˆ W mapping from idenfiers (in N ) to extended window functions ◮ choice function ch ( S 1 , S 2 ) �→ S ′ w ( S 1 , S 2 , t ) = w ( ch ( S 1 , S 2 ) , t ) ˆ ◮ Example H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 9 / 15

  73. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Semantics: Structure ◮ Structure M = � T , υ, ˆ W � , where ◮ ( T , υ ) original stream ◮ ˆ W mapping from idenfiers (in N ) to extended window functions ◮ choice function ch ( S 1 , S 2 ) �→ S ′ w ( S 1 , S 2 , t ) = w ( ch ( S 1 , S 2 ) , t ) ˆ ◮ Example ◮ w 5 time-based window for last 5 minutes H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 9 / 15

  74. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Semantics: Structure ◮ Structure M = � T , υ, ˆ W � , where ◮ ( T , υ ) original stream ◮ ˆ W mapping from idenfiers (in N ) to extended window functions ◮ choice function ch ( S 1 , S 2 ) �→ S ′ w ( S 1 , S 2 , t ) = w ( ch ( S 1 , S 2 ) , t ) ˆ ◮ Example ◮ w 5 time-based window for last 5 minutes ◮ ch 2 choice that selects the second stream ( ch 2 ( S 1 , S 2 ) = S 2 ) H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 9 / 15

  75. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Semantics: Structure ◮ Structure M = � T , υ, ˆ W � , where ◮ ( T , υ ) original stream ◮ ˆ W mapping from idenfiers (in N ) to extended window functions ◮ choice function ch ( S 1 , S 2 ) �→ S ′ w ( S 1 , S 2 , t ) = w ( ch ( S 1 , S 2 ) , t ) ˆ ◮ Example ◮ w 5 time-based window for last 5 minutes ◮ ch 2 choice that selects the second stream ( ch 2 ( S 1 , S 2 ) = S 2 ) ◮ ˆ w 5 , where ˆ w 5 ( S 1 , S 2 , t ) = w 5 ( S 2 , t ) W ( 1 ) = ˆ H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 9 / 15

  76. Scope & Motivation Windows & Time Framework Examples Conclusion & Outlook Semantics: Entailment ◮ Structure M = � T , υ, ˆ W � with original stream S M = ( T , υ ) H. Beck (TU Vienna) Towards Ideal Semantics for Analyzing Stream Reasoning ReactKnow’14 10 / 15

Recommend

Stream Reasoning with LARS Harald Beck Minh Dao-Tran Thomas Eiter The 2nd Stream Reasoning

Stream Reasoning with LARS Harald Beck Minh Dao-Tran Thomas Eiter The 2nd Stream Reasoning

Stream Reasoning with LARS Harald Beck Minh Dao-Tran Thomas Eiter The 2nd Stream Reasoning Workshop December 8-9, 2016 Outline LARS Overview (Revised) LARS Syntax and Semantics Recent and Ongoing LARS Research @ KBS LARS Collaboration

1.02k views • 30 slides
Towards a Logic-Based Framework for Analyzing Stream Reasoning Harald Beck Minh Dao-Tran Thomas

Towards a Logic-Based Framework for Analyzing Stream Reasoning Harald Beck Minh Dao-Tran Thomas

Towards a Logic-Based Framework for Analyzing Stream Reasoning Harald Beck Minh Dao-Tran Thomas Eiter Michael Fink 3rd International Workshop on Ordering and Reasoning October 20, 2014 Motivation Streams Logical Framework Conclusions

547 views • 52 slides
Approximate Stream Reasoning with Incomplete State Information Fourth Stream Reasoning Workshop,

Approximate Stream Reasoning with Incomplete State Information Fourth Stream Reasoning Workshop,

Approximate Stream Reasoning with Incomplete State Information Fourth Stream Reasoning Workshop, Link oping, Sweden Daniel de Leng Artificial Intelligence and Integrated Computer Systems Department of Computer and Information Science Link

504 views • 29 slides
Stream Reasoning For Linked Data M. Balduini, J-P Calbimonte, O. Corcho, D. Dell'Aglio, E. Della

Stream Reasoning For Linked Data M. Balduini, J-P Calbimonte, O. Corcho, D. Dell'Aglio, E. Della

Stream Reasoning For Linked Data M. Balduini, J-P Calbimonte, O. Corcho, D. Dell'Aglio, E. Della Valle, and J.Z. Pan http://streamreasoning.org/sr4ld2013 OWL Reasoning and Stream Reasoning with LOD Jeff Z. Pan University of Aberdeen

854 views • 60 slides
Stream Reasoning with ASP Alessandra Mileo alessandra.mileo@insight-centre.org

Stream Reasoning with ASP Alessandra Mileo alessandra.mileo@insight-centre.org

Stream Reasoning For Linked Data J-P Calbimonte, D. Dell'Aglio, E. Della Valle, M.I. Ali and A. Mileo http://streamreasoning.org/events/sr4ld2015 Stream Reasoning with ASP Alessandra Mileo alessandra.mileo@insight-centre.org

750 views • 58 slides
Stream Reasoning introduction Emanuele Della Valle emanuele.dellavalle@polimi.it

Stream Reasoning introduction Emanuele Della Valle emanuele.dellavalle@polimi.it

Stream Reasoning For Linked Data M. Balduini, J-P Calbimonte, O. Corcho, D. Dell'Aglio, and E. Della Valle http://streamreasoning.org/events/sr4ld2014 Stream Reasoning introduction Emanuele Della Valle emanuele.dellavalle@polimi.it

701 views • 38 slides
Stream Reasoning introduction Emanuele Della Valle emanuele.dellavalle@polimi.it

Stream Reasoning introduction Emanuele Della Valle emanuele.dellavalle@polimi.it

Stream Reasoning For Linked Data M. Balduini, J-P Calbimonte, O. Corcho, D. Dell'Aglio, E. Della Valle, and J.Z. Pan http://streamreasoning.org/sr4ld2013 Stream Reasoning introduction Emanuele Della Valle emanuele.dellavalle@polimi.it

955 views • 31 slides
The realm of stream reasoning G. Cugola E. Della Valle

The realm of stream reasoning G. Cugola E. Della Valle

Stream and Complex Event Processing The realm of stream reasoning G. Cugola E. Della Valle A. Margara Politecnico di Milano

728 views • 56 slides
Quantitative Stream Reasoning with LARS Rafael Kiesel, Thomas Eiter Vienna University of

Quantitative Stream Reasoning with LARS Rafael Kiesel, Thomas Eiter Vienna University of

Introduction Weighted LARS Quantitative Stream Reasoning Future/Ongoing work Questions Quantitative Stream Reasoning with LARS Rafael Kiesel, Thomas Eiter Vienna University of Technology funded by FWF project W1255-N23 17 th of April 2019

417 views • 29 slides
DL-based Stream Reasoning Emanuele Della Valle Share, Remix, Reuse Legally This work is

DL-based Stream Reasoning Emanuele Della Valle Share, Remix, Reuse Legally This work is

How to Build a Stream Reasoning Application D. Dell'Aglio, E. Della Valle, T. Le-Pham, A. Mileo, and R. Tommasini http://streamreasoning.org/events/streamapp2017 DL-based Stream Reasoning Emanuele Della Valle Share, Remix, Reuse Legally

659 views • 29 slides
CHAPTER-4 1 LOGIC AND REASONING ! Knowledge and ! Reasoning in Knowledge- Reasoning Based

CHAPTER-4 1 LOGIC AND REASONING ! Knowledge and ! Reasoning in Knowledge- Reasoning Based

CHAPTER-4 1 LOGIC AND REASONING ! Knowledge and ! Reasoning in Knowledge- Reasoning Based Systems ! syntax and semantics ! shallow and deep reasoning ! validity and satisfiability ! forward and backward ! logic languages chaining ! alternative

616 views • 23 slides
Other Stream Reasoning approaches Oscar Corcho, Emanuele Della Valle ocorcho@fi.upm.es,

Other Stream Reasoning approaches Oscar Corcho, Emanuele Della Valle ocorcho@fi.upm.es,

Stream Reasoning For Linked Data M. Balduini, J-P Calbimonte, O. Corcho, D. Dell'Aglio, E. Della Valle, and J.Z. Pan http://streamreasoning.org/sr4ld2013 Other Stream Reasoning approaches Oscar Corcho, Emanuele Della Valle ocorcho@fi.upm.es,

308 views • 13 slides
Other Stream Reasoning Approaches Jean-Paul Calbimonte, Oscar Corcho, Daniele Dell'Aglio,

Other Stream Reasoning Approaches Jean-Paul Calbimonte, Oscar Corcho, Daniele Dell'Aglio,

Stream Reasoning For Linked Data J-P Calbimonte, D. Dell'Aglio, E. Della Valle, M.I. Ali and A. Mileo http://streamreasoning.org/events/sr4ld2015 Other Stream Reasoning Approaches Jean-Paul Calbimonte, Oscar Corcho, Daniele Dell'Aglio,

720 views • 61 slides
Approximate Reasoning for the Semantic Web Part II OWL Semantics and Tableau Reasoning Frank van

Approximate Reasoning for the Semantic Web Part II OWL Semantics and Tableau Reasoning Frank van

van Harmelen, Hitzler, Wache ESSLLI 2006 Malaga, Spain August 2006 AIFB Approximate Reasoning for the Semantic Web Part II OWL Semantics and Tableau Reasoning Frank van Harmelen Pascal Hitzler Holger Wache ESSLLI 2006 Summer

520 views • 34 slides
with ASP Alessandra Mileo Share, Remix, Reuse Legally This work is licensed under the

with ASP Alessandra Mileo Share, Remix, Reuse Legally This work is licensed under the

How to Build a Stream Reasoning Application D. Dell'Aglio, E. Della Valle, T. Le-Pham, A. Mileo, and R. Tommasini http://streamreasoning.org/events/streamapp2017 Expressive Stream Reasoning with ASP Alessandra Mileo Share, Remix, Reuse

527 views • 27 slides
Input/output Tiny +++ S Stmt ::= . . . | read x | write e Andrzej Tarlecki: Semantics &

Input/output Tiny +++ S Stmt ::= . . . | read x | write e Andrzej Tarlecki: Semantics &

Input/output Tiny +++ S Stmt ::= . . . | read x | write e Andrzej Tarlecki: Semantics & Verification - 106 - Semantic domains Stream = Int Stream + { eof } Input = Stream Output = Stream State = Store Input Output

255 views • 22 slides
Asynchronous Communication II: Semantics, specification and reasoning INF 4140 Lecture 11

Asynchronous Communication II: Semantics, specification and reasoning INF 4140 Lecture 11

INF4140 Asynchronous Communication II: Semantics, specification and reasoning INF 4140 Lecture 11 09.11.11, page 1. INF4140 Overview: Last time semantics: histories and trace sets specification: invariants over histories global

859 views • 37 slides
Operational Semantics This course Why semantics? y := 1; precise specification of software

Operational Semantics This course Why semantics? y := 1; precise specification of software

Operational Semantics This course Why semantics? y := 1; precise specification of software and while ( x = 1) do ( y := x y ; x := x 1) hardware First we assign 1 to y , then we test whether facilitate reasoning about systems:

355 views • 10 slides
Overview of the Course A. Semantic Web in general and OWL syntax B. OWL Semantics (DLs) and

Overview of the Course A. Semantic Web in general and OWL syntax B. OWL Semantics (DLs) and

Part C Approximate reasoning in general Holger Wache Overview of the Course A. Semantic Web in general and OWL syntax B. OWL Semantics (DLs) and tableaux reasoning C. Approximate reasoning in general D. Approximate reasoning on tableaux

791 views • 30 slides
Heaven, a framework for a systematic comparative research approach of RSP Engines Stream

Heaven, a framework for a systematic comparative research approach of RSP Engines Stream

Heaven, a framework for a systematic comparative research approach of RSP Engines Stream Reasoning Workshop 2016 R. Tommasini,E. Della Valle, M. Balduini, D. DellAglio 1 Stream Reasoning Workshop, Berlin, 2016 - Riccardo Tommasini -

447 views • 32 slides
Proof-theoretic semantics, self-contradiction and the format of deductive reasoning Peter

Proof-theoretic semantics, self-contradiction and the format of deductive reasoning Peter

To appear as an article in: L. Tranchini (ed.), Anti-Realistic Notions of Truth, Special issue of Topoi vol. 31 no. 1, 2012 Proof-theoretic semantics, self-contradiction and the format of deductive reasoning Peter Schroeder-Heister In Honour

464 views • 31 slides
Semantics 1 / 21 Outline What is semantics? Denotational semantics Semantics of naming What

Semantics 1 / 21 Outline What is semantics? Denotational semantics Semantics of naming What

Semantics 1 / 21 Outline What is semantics? Denotational semantics Semantics of naming What is semantics? 2 / 21 What is the meaning of a program? Recall: aspects of a language syntax : the structure of its programs semantics : the

553 views • 21 slides
IMPLEMENTING LOGIC BY SEMANTICS The RISCAL Approach to Automating Program Reasoning over Finite

IMPLEMENTING LOGIC BY SEMANTICS The RISCAL Approach to Automating Program Reasoning over Finite

IMPLEMENTING LOGIC BY SEMANTICS The RISCAL Approach to Automating Program Reasoning over Finite Domains Wolfgang Schreiner Research Institute for Symbolic Computation (RISC) Formal Methods in Computer Science Specification: Describe

458 views • 28 slides
Reasoning in Abella about Structural Operational Semantics Specifications Andrew Gacek 1 Dale

Reasoning in Abella about Structural Operational Semantics Specifications Andrew Gacek 1 Dale

Reasoning in Abella about Structural Operational Semantics Specifications Andrew Gacek 1 Dale Miller 2 Gopalan Nadathur 1 1 Department of Computer Science and Engineering University of Minnesota 2 INRIA Saclay - le-de-France & LIX/cole

314 views • 17 slides

More recommend