Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Wilks, Y. (2008)
Publisher: IEEE Computer Soc
Languages: English
Types: Article
This article discusses what kind of entity the proposed Semantic Web (SW) is, principally by reference to the relationship of natural language structure to knowledge representation (KR). There are three distinct views on this issue. The first is that the SW is basically a renaming of the traditional AI KR task, with all its problems and challenges. The second view is that the SW will be, at a minimum, the World Wide Web with its constituent documents annotated so as to yield their content, or meaning structure, more directly. This view makes natural language processing central as the procedural bridge from texts to KR, usually via some form of automated information extraction. The third view is that the SW is about trusted databases as the foundation of a system of Web processes and services. There's also a fourth view, which is much more difficult to define and discuss: If the SW just keeps moving as an engineering development and is lucky, then real problems won't arise. This article is part of a special issue called Semantic Web Update.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • 1. T. Berners-Lee, J. Hendler, and O. Lassila, “The Semantic Web,” Scientific American , May 2001, pp. 34-43.
    • 2. L. Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations, Oxford Univ. Press, 1953.
    • 3. G. Hirst, “Context as a Spurious Concept,” Proc. Conf. Intelligent Text Processing and Computational Linguistics, 2000, pp. 273-287.
    • 4. Y. Wilks and M. den Besten, “Digital Technologies Shaping E-research,” to be published in World Wide Science: Promises, Threats, and Realities, Oxford Univ. Press.
    • 5. P. Patel-Schneider, P.J. Hayes, and I. Horrocks, OWL Web Ontology: Language Semantics and Abstract Syntax, W3C recommendation, Feb. 2004, www.w3.org/ TR/owl-semantics.
    • 6. I. Horrocks, “Description Logics in Ontology Applications,” Proc. KI/Tableaux 2005, 2005, www.gusconstan.com/AI/ DescriptionLogics.htm.
    • 7. J. McCarthy and P. Hayes, “Some Philosophical Problems from the Point of View of Articfiial Intelligence,” Machine Intelligence 4, D. Michie, ed., Edinburgh Univ. Press, 1969, pp. 463-502.
    • 8. J. McCarthy, Formalizing Common Sense: Papers by John McCarthy, Ablex, 1990.
    • 9. P.J. Hayes, “The Naive Physics Manifesto,” Expert Systems in the Micro-Electronic Age, D. Michie, ed., Edinburgh Univ. Press, 1979, pp. 242-270.
    • 10. D. Bobrow and T. Winograd, “An Overview of KRL, a Knowledge Representation Language,” Cognitive Science, vol. 1, no. 1, 1977, pp. 3-46.
    • 11. J. Cowie and Y. Wilks, “Information Extraction,” Handbook of Natural Language Processing, R. Dale, H. Moisl, and H. Somers, eds., Marcel Dekker, 2000, pp. 190-211.
    • 12. H. Cunningham et al., GATE-a Tipster - Based General Architecture for Text Engineering,” Proc. Tipster Text Program Phase III, Morgan Kaufmann, 1997, pp. 45-65.
    • 13. C.F. Goldfarb, “SGML: The Reason Why and the First Published Hint,” J. Am. Soc. Information Science, vol. 48, no. 2, 1997, pp. 44-49.
    • 14. K. Bontcheva and H. Cunningham, “Information Extraction as a Semantic Web Technology: Requirements and Promises,” Proc. Adaptive Text Extraction and Mining Workshop, 2003, pp. 222-235.
    • 15. F. Ciravegna, “Designing Adaptive Information Extraction for the Semantic Web in Amilcare,” Annotation for the Semantic Web, S. Handschuh and S. Staab, eds., IOS Press, 2003, pp. 23-45.
    • 16. N. Sager, “The String Parser for Scienticfi Literature,” Natural Language Processing, R. Rustin, ed., Cambridge Univ. Press, 1973, pp. 61-87.
    • 17. G. DeJong, “Skimming Stories in Real Time: An Experiment in Integrated Understanding,” PhD thesis, Computer Science Dept., Yale Univ., 1979.
    • 18. G. Leech, R. Garside, and M. Bryant, “Cswla 4: The Tagging of the British National Corpus,” Proc. 15th Int'l Conf. Computational Linguistics (Colign 94), 1994. pp. 622-628.
    • 19. C. Brewster et al., “The Ontology: Chimaera or Pegasus,” Proc. Dagstuhl Seminar Machine Learning for the Semantic Web, 2005, pp. 89-101.
    • 20. B. Norton, S. Chapman, and F. Ciravegna, Orchestration of Semantic Web Services for Large-Scale Document Annotation, Springer, 2005.
    • 21. R. Braithwaite, Scientific Explanation , Cambridge Univ. Press, 1956.
    • 22. C. Hewitt, “Procedural Semantics,” Natural Language Processing, R. Rustin, ed., Algorithmics Press, 1972, pp. 99-118.
    • 23. H. Longuet-Higgins, “The Algorithmic Description of Natural Language,” Proc. Royal Soc. London B, vol. 182, 1972, pp. 255-276.
    • 24. Y. Wilks, “What Would a Wittgensteinian Computational Linguistics Be Like?” Proc. 10th Int'l Congress Pragmatics, 2005, pp. 212-227.
    • 25. S. Nirenburg and Y. Wilks, “What's in a Symbol,” J. Theoretical and Empirical AI, vol. 13, no. 1, 2001, pp. 9-23.
    • 26. W. Woods, “What's in a Link: Foundations for Semantic Networks,” Representation and Understanding: Studies in Cognitive Science, Academic Press, 1975, pp. 35-82.
    • 27. R. Schank, “Conceptual Dependency: A Theory of Natural Language Understanding,” Cognitive Psychology, vol. 3, no. 4, 1972, pp. 67-88.
    • 28. D. Lewis, “General Semantics,” The Semantics of Natural Language, D. Davidson and G. Harman, eds., Kluwer, 1972.
    • 29. K. Spärck Jones, “What's New about the Semantic Web? Some Questions,” ACM Sigr Forum, vol. 38, no. 2, 2004, www. sigir.org/forum/2004D/sparck_jones_ sigirforum_2004d.pdf.
    • 30. C. Brewster, F. Ciravegna, and Y. Wilks, “Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge Management,” Proc. Ijcai 2001 Workshop Ontology Learning, 2001, pp. 121-134.
    • 31. J. Olney, C. Revard, and P. Ziff, “Some Monsters in Noah's Ark,” research memo, Systems Development Corp., 1968.
    • 32. F. Jelinek and J. Lafferty, “Computation of the Probability of Initial Substring Generation by Stochastic Context-Free Grammars,” Computational Linguistics, vol. 17, no. 3, 1991, pp. 315-323.
    • 33. A. Kilgarriff and G. Grefenstette, eds., special issue on the Web as corpus, Computational Linguistics, vol. 29, no. 3, 2003.
    • 34. R.K. Moore, “A Comparison of Data Requirements for ASR Systems and Human Listeners,” Proc. Eurosepch 2003, 2003, pp. 238-251.
    • 35. G. Grefenstette, “The Scale of the Multilingual Web,” presentation at Search Engine Meeting 2004.
    • 36. D. Guthrie et al., “A Closer Look at Skipgram Modelling,” Proc. 5th Int'l Conf. Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 06), European Language Development Assoc., 2006, pp. 101-111.
    • 37. Y. Wilks, Computable Semantic Derivations, tech. report SP-3017, Systems Development Corp., 1968.
    • 38. E. Hovy, “Key toward Large-Scale Shallow Semantics for Higher-Quality NLP,” Proc. 12th Pcaling Conf., 2005, pp. 98-107.
    • 39. D. Lenat, “CyC: A Large-Scale Investment in Knowledge Infrastructure,” Comm. ACM, vol. 38, no. 11, 1996, pp. 33-38.
    • 40. H. Putnam, “The Meaning of 'Meaning,'” Philosophical Papers, Vol. 2: Mind, Language and Reality, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1975/1985, pp. 215-271.
    • 41. D.H. Mellor, “Natural Kinds,” British J. Philosophy of Science, vol. 28, no. 2, 1977, pp. 1-23.
    • 42. Y. Wilks, “Putnam and Clarke and Mind and Body,” British J. Philosophy of Science, vol. 26, no. 3, 1975, pp. 23-30.
    • 43. T. Kazic, “Putting the Semantics into the Semantic Web: How Well Can It Capture Biology?” Proc. Pacific Symp. Bioc omputing, 2006, pp. 140-151, http://helix-web. stanford.edu/psb06/kazic.pdf.
    • 44. D. McDermott, “Articfiial Intelligence Meets Natural Stupidity,” Mind Design, J. Haugeland, ed., Bradford, 1981, pp. 143-160.
    • 45. W.V.O. Quine, From a Logical Point of View, Harvard Univ. Press, 1953.
    • 46. A. Morgan et al., “Gene Name Extraction Using FlyBase Resources,” Proc. ACL Workshop Language Processing in Biomedicine, Assoc. Computational Linguistics, 2003, pp. 23-41.
    • 47. I. Horrocks and P. Patel-Schneider, “Three Theses of Representation in the Semantic Web,” Proc. 12th Int'l World Wide Web Conf. (WWW 03), ACM Press, 2003, pp. 39-47, www2003.org/cdrom/papers/ refereed/p050/p50-horrocks.html.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article