Skip Navigation


Journal of Logic and Computation Advance Access originally published online on September 30, 2008
Journal of Logic and Computation 2009 19(5):771-790; doi:10.1093/logcom/exn045
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Golbeck, J.
Right arrow Articles by Halaschek-Wiener, C.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author, 2008. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

This article appears in the following Journal of Logic and Computation issue: Special Issue: Recent Advances in Ontology Dynamics [View the issue table of contents]

Original Articles

Trust-based Revision for Expressive Web Syndication

Jennifer Golbeck

College of Information Studies, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA.
E-mail: jgolbeck{at}umd.edu

Christian Halaschek-Wiener

Clados Management LLC, San Mateo, CA 94404, USA.
E-mail: christian{at}clados.com

Received 7 November 2007.

Interest in web-based syndication systems has been growing as information streams onto the web at an increasing rate. Technologies, like the standard Semantic Web languages RDF and OWL, make it possible to create expressive representations of the content of publications and subscriptions in a syndication framework. Because these languages are based in description logics, this representation allows the application to reasoning to make more precise matching of user interests with published information. A challenge to this approach is that the consistency of the underlying knowledge base must be maintained for these techniques to work. With the frequent addition of information from new publications, it is likely that inconsistencies will arise. There are many potential mechanisms for choosing which inconsistent information to discard from the KB to regain consistency; in the case of news syndication, we argue keeping the most trusted information is important for generating the most valuable matches. Thus, in this article, we present algorithms for belief-base revision, and specifically look at the user's trust in the information sources as a metric for deciding what to keep in the KB and what to remove.



References

  1. Aguilera MK, Strom RE, Sturman DC, Astley M, Chandra TD. Matching events in a content-based subscription system. In: In Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (1999).
  2. Alchourron C, Makinson D. On the logic of theory change: Safe contraction. Studia Logica (1985) 44:405–422.[CrossRef]
  3. Alchourrón CE, Gärdenfors P, Makinson D. On the logic of theory change: partial meet contraction and revision functions. Journal of Symbolic Logic (1985) 50:510–530.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  4. Altinel M, Franklin MJ. Efficient filtering of XMLdocuments for selective dissemination of information. The VLDB Journal (2000) 53–64.
  5. Baader F, Hollunder B. Embedding defaults into terminological representation systems. Journal of Automated Reasoning (1995) 14:149–180.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  6. Banavar G, Chandra TD, Mukherjee B, Nagarajarao J, Strom RE, Stur DC. Anefficient multicast protocol for content-based publish-subscribe systems. In: In ICDCS’99: Proceedings of the 19th IEEE International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (1999) Washington DC, USA: IEEE Computer Society. 262.
  7. Carzaniga A, Rutherford M, Wolf A. A routing scheme for content-based networking. In: Technical Report CU-CS-953-03 (2003) Department of Computer Science, University of Colorado.
  8. Carzaniga A, Wolf AL. Forwarding in a content-based network. (2003) SIGCOMM’03: Proceedings of the 2003 conference on Applications, technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communications: ACM, New York, NY, USA. 163–174.
  9. Chan CY, Felber P, Garofalakis MN, Rastogi R. Efficient filtering of XML documents with XPath expressions. The VLDB Journal (2002) 11:354–379.[CrossRef]
  10. Chirita PA, Idreos S, Koubarakis M, Nejdl W. Publish/subscribe for rdf-based p2p networks. (2004) Proceedings of 1st European Semantic Web Symposium. 182–197.
  11. Cilia M, Bornhsvd C, Buchmann AP. Cream: an infrastructure for distributed, heterogeneous event-based applications. (2003) Proceedings of the International Conference on Cooperative Information Systems. 482–502.
  12. Crespo A, Garcia-Molina H. Routing indices for peer-to-peer systems. In: In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS’02) (2002) Washington DC, USA: IEEE Computer Society. 23.
  13. Deutsch M. The Resolution of Conflict (1973) New Haven: Yale University Press.
  14. Diao Y, Rizvi S, Franklin M. Towards an internet-scale xml dissemination service. In. In: Proceedings of VLDB2004, August 2004 (2004) 612–623.
  15. Fabret F, Jacobsen HA, Llirbat F, Pereira J, Ross KA, Shasha D. Filtering algorithms and implementation for very fast publish/subscribe systems. SIGMOD Record (ACM Special Interest Group on Management of Data) (2001) 30:115–126.
  16. Flouris G. On Belief Change and Ontology Evolution (2006) University of Crete. Ph.D. Dissertation.
  17. Flouris G, Plexousakis D, Antoniou G. On applying the agm theory to dls and owl. In: In Proceedings of the 4th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2005) (2005).
  18. Flouris G, Plexousakis D, Antoniou G. Updating description logic using the agm theory. In: In 7th International Symposium on Logical Formalizations of Commonsense Reasoning (2005).
  19. Flouris G, Plexousakis D, Antoniou G. Generalizing the agm postulates: preliminary results and applications. In. In: Proceedings of the 10th InternationalWorkshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning (NMR 2004) (2004) Canada: Whistler. 171–179.
  20. Furmann A. Theory contraction through base contraction. Journal of Philosophical Logic (1991) 20:175–203.[Web of Science]
  21. Gärdenfors P, Makinson D. Revisions of knowledge systems using epistemic entrenchment. In: In Proceedings of the 2nd Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning about Knowledge (1988) San Francisco, CA, USA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc. 83–95.
  22. Golbeck J. Computing and Applying Trust in Web-based Social Networks (2005) College Park, MD, USA: University of Maryland. PhD thesis.
  23. Golbeck J. Generating predictive movie recommendations from trust in social networks. (2006) Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Trust Management. 93–104.
  24. Golbeck J. Trust and nuanced profile similarity in online social networks. Transactions on the Web (2008) (in press).
  25. Golembiewski RT, McConkie M. The centrality of interpersonal trust in group processes. In. In: Theories of Group Processes—Cooper C, ed. (1975) Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
  26. Gregorio J, de hîra B. The atom publishing protocol. In. IETF Internet Draft (2005).
  27. Gupta AK, Suciu D. Stream processing of xpath queries with predicates. (2003) SIGMOD’03: Proceedings of the 2003 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data: ACM Press, New York, NY, USA. 419–430.
  28. Haarslev V, Moller R. Description logic systems with concrete domains: applications for the semantic web. In. In: International Workshop on KR meets Databases (2003).
  29. Haarslev V, Möller R. Incremental query answering for implementing document retrieval services. In. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Description Logics (2003).
  30. Halaschek-Wiener FC. Expressive Syndication on the Web Using a Description Logic Based Approach (2007) College Park: University of Maryland. PhD thesis.
  31. Halaschek-Weiner C, Hendler J. Toward expressive syndication on the web. In: In Proceedings of the 16th World Wide Web Conference (2007).
  32. Halaschek-Wiener C, Parsia B, Sirin E. Description logic reasoning with syntactic updates. (2006) Proceedings of the International Conference on Ontologies, Databases, and Applications of Semantics. 722–737.
  33. Hansson SO. New operators for theory change. Theoria (1989) 55:114–133.
  34. Hansson SO. Belief Base Dynamics (1991) Uppsala University: Uppsala University. PhD Thesis.
  35. Hansson SO. Kernel contraction. Journal of Symbolic Logic (1994) 59:845–859.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  36. Hansson SO. Semi-revision. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics (1997) 7.
  37. Hansson SO. A Textbook on Belief Dynamics (1999) Norwell, MA, USA: Kluwer Academic Press.
  38. Kalyanpur A. Debugging and Repair of Owl Ontologies (2006) College Park: University of Maryland. Ph.D. Dissertation.
  39. Katz Y, Golbeck J. Social network-based trust in prioritized default logic. In: In Proceedings of the Twenty-First National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-06) (2006).
  40. Kuter U, Golbeck J. Sunny: a new algorithm for trust inference in social networks, using probabilistic confidence models. In: In Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) (2007).
  41. Lakshmanan LVS, Parthasarathy S. On efficient matching of streaming XML documents and queries. In. In: Extending Database Technology (2002) Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer. 142–160.
  42. Lassila O, Swick RR. Resource description framework (rdf) model and syntax specification (1999) Cambridge, MA: W3C recommendation, World Wide Web consortium.
  43. Li L, Horrocks I. Asoftware framework for matchmaking based on semantic web technology. In: In Proceedings of the 12th International World Wide Web Conference (2003) 331–339.
  44. Libby D. Rss 0.91 spec, revision 3. In. In: Proceedings of the Netscape Comm (1999).
  45. Liu H, Lutz C, Milicic M, Wolter F. Updating description logic aboxes. In: In Proceedings of the International Conference of Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning(KR) (2006).
  46. Nebel B. Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference. Brachman R, Levesque HJ, Reiter R, eds. (1989) Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference: Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo. 301–311.
  47. Nebel B. Syntax-based approaches to belief revision. In. In: Belief Revision—Gärdenfors P, ed. (1992) 29. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 52–88.
  48. Nebel B. How hard is it to revise a belief base? In. In: Handbook of Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems, Volume 3: Belief Change—Dubois D, Prade H, eds. (1998) Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 77–145.
  49. Nejdl W, Wolpers M, Siberski W, Schmitz C, Schlosser M, Brunkhorst I, Loser A. Superpeer-based routing and clustering strategies for rdf-based peer-to-peer networks. (2003) Proceedings of the 12th International World Wide Web Conference. 536–543.
  50. Nottingham M, Sayre R. The atom syndication format. In. IETF Internet Draft (2005).
  51. Oki B, Pfluegl M, Skeen D. The information bus:An architecture for extensible distributed systems. In. In: Proceedings of the 14th SOSP (1993) 58–68.
  52. Paolucci M, Kawamura T, Payne TR, Sycara K. Semantic matching of web services capabilities. (2002) The First International Semantic Web Conference. 333–347.
  53. Petrovic M, Burcea I, Jacobsen H-A. S-topss: semantic Toronto publish/subscribe system. (2003) VLDB’03: Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases. 1101–1104.
  54. Petrovic M, Liu H, Jacobsen H-A. Cms-topss: efficient dissemination of rss documents. (2005) VLDB’05: Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Very Large Data Bases: VLDB Endowment, Trondheim, Norway. 1279–1282.
  55. Reiter R. A theory of diagnosis from first principles. Artificial Intelligence (1987) 32:57–95.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  56. Ribeiro MM, Wasserman R. Base revision in description logics – preliminary results. In. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Ontology Dynamics (IWOD 2007) (2007).
  57. Parikh R, Chopra S, Georgatos K. Relevance sensitive non-monotonic inference on belief sequences. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics (2001) 11:131–150.[CrossRef]
  58. Sztompka P. Trust: A Sociological Theory (1999) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  59. Uschold M, Clark P, Dickey F, Fung C, Smith S, Wilke SUM, Bechhofer S, Horrocks I. A semantic infosphere. In: In Proceedings of the International Semantic Web Conference (2003) 882–896.
  60. Wang J, Jin B, Li J. An ontology-based publish/subscribe system. (2004) Middleware’04: Proceedings of the 5th ACM/IFIP/USENIX International Conference on Middleware: Springer-Verlag, New York. 232–253.
  61. Wassermann R. An algorithm for belief revision. (2000) Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR2000). 345–352.
  62. Yan TW, Garcia-Molina H. The SIFT information dissemination system. ACM Transactions on Database Systems (1999) 24:529–565.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  63. Yoneki E, Bacon J. Distributed multicast grouping for publish/subscribe over mobile ad hoc networks. (2005) Proceedings of theWireless Communications and Networking Conference. 2293–2299.
  64. Ziegler C-N, Golbeck J. Investigating correlations of trust and interest similarity. Decision Support Services (2006) 43:460–475.

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?



This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Golbeck, J.
Right arrow Articles by Halaschek-Wiener, C.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?