@inproceedings{ Hustadt94c,
  author = {Hustadt, Ullrich},
  title = {Do we need the closed-world assumption in knowledge
representation},
  booktitle = {Working Notes of the KI'94 Workshop: Reasoning about 
                  Structured Objects: Knowledge Representation Meets 
                  Databases (KRDB'94)},
  editor = {Baader, Franz and Buchheit, Martin and Jeusfeld, Manfred A.
                  and Nutt, Werner},
  series = {Document},
  volume = {D-94-11},
  publisher = {DFKI},
  pages = {24--26},
  paddress = {Saarbrücken, Germany},
  pmonth = {November},
  caddress = {Saarbrücken, Germany},
  cyear = {1994},
  cmonth = {September~20--21},
  abstract = {In this paper I want to focus on some principal 
     differences between data models of database systems and knowledge 
     representation languages.  

     The data manipulation languages of data models are based on the
     closed-world, unique-name, and domain-closure assumption.
     Data manipulation languages and query languages of
     knowledge representation formalisms differ considerably in their
     underlying assumptions. They are based on the open-world, unique-name, 
     and open-domain assumption. 
     That means, that even if the data definition language and the data
     manipulation language of a database management system and a knowledge
     base management system would coincide, the results of data
     manipulations would differ. 

     I present some examples that show the usefulness
     of closed-world inferences in natural language processing. Thus
     knowledge representation languages sticking to the open-world
     assumption seem to be insufficient for natural language processing.}
}

{"_id":{"_str":"52015028d40bcbb041000896"},"__v":0,"authorIDs":[],"author_short":["Hustadt, U."],"bibbaseid":"hustadt-doweneedtheclosedworldassumptioninknowledgerepresentation","bibdata":{"html":"<div class=\"bibbase_paper\">\n\n\n<span class=\"bibbase_paper_titleauthoryear\">\n\t<span class=\"bibbase_paper_title\"><a name=\"Hustadt94c\"> </a>Do we need the closed-world assumption in knowledge representation.</span>\n\t<span class=\"bibbase_paper_author\">\nHustadt, U.</span>\n\t<!-- <span class=\"bibbase_paper_year\">undefined</span>. -->\n</span>\n\n\n\nIn\nBaader, F.; Buchheit, M.; Jeusfeld, M.&nbsp;A.; and Nutt, W., editor, <i>Working Notes of the KI'94 Workshop: Reasoning about Structured Objects: Knowledge Representation Meets Databases (KRDB'94)</i>, volume D-94-11, of <i>Document</i>, page 24--26, .\n\n\nDFKI.\n\n\n\n\n<br class=\"bibbase_paper_content\"/>\n\n<span class=\"bibbase_paper_content\">\n \n \n \n <a href=\"javascript:showBib('Hustadt94c')\">\n <img src=\"http://www.bibbase.org/img/filetypes/bib.png\" \n\t alt=\"Do we need the closed-world assumption in knowledge representation [bib]\" \n\t class=\"bibbase_icon\"\n\t style=\"width: 24px; height: 24px; border: 0px; vertical-align: text-top\"><span class=\"bibbase_icon_text\">Bibtex</span></a>\n \n &nbsp; \n\n \n \n &nbsp;\n \n \n\n \n <a class=\"bibbase_abstract_link\" href=\"javascript:showAbstract('Hustadt94c')\">Abstract</a>\n \n \n</span>\n\n<!-- -->\n<!-- <div id=\"abstract_Hustadt94c\"> -->\n<!-- In this paper I want to focus on some principal differences between data models of database systems and knowledge representation languages. The data manipulation languages of data models are based on the closed-world, unique-name, and domain-closure assumption. Data manipulation languages and query languages of knowledge representation formalisms differ considerably in their underlying assumptions. They are based on the open-world, unique-name, and open-domain assumption. That means, that even if the data definition language and the data manipulation language of a database management system and a knowledge base management system would coincide, the results of data manipulations would differ. I present some examples that show the usefulness of closed-world inferences in natural language processing. Thus knowledge representation languages sticking to the open-world assumption seem to be insufficient for natural language processing. -->\n<!-- </div> -->\n<!-- -->\n\n</div>\n","downloads":0,"bibbaseid":"hustadt-doweneedtheclosedworldassumptioninknowledgerepresentation","urls":{},"role":"author","volume":"D-94-11","type":"inproceedings","title":"Do we need the closed-world assumption in knowledge representation","series":"Document","publisher":"DFKI","pmonth":"November","pages":"24--26","paddress":"Saarbrücken, Germany","key":"Hustadt94c","id":"Hustadt94c","editor_short":["Baader, F.","Buchheit, M.","Jeusfeld, M.<nbsp>A.","Nutt, W."],"editor":["Baader, Franz","Buchheit, Martin","Jeusfeld, Manfred A.","Nutt, Werner"],"cyear":"1994","cmonth":"September~20--21","caddress":"Saarbrücken, Germany","booktitle":"Working Notes of the KI'94 Workshop: Reasoning about Structured Objects: Knowledge Representation Meets Databases (KRDB'94)","bibtype":"inproceedings","bibtex":"@inproceedings{ Hustadt94c,\n author = {Hustadt, Ullrich},\n title = {Do we need the closed-world assumption in knowledge\nrepresentation},\n booktitle = {Working Notes of the KI'94 Workshop: Reasoning about \n Structured Objects: Knowledge Representation Meets \n Databases (KRDB'94)},\n editor = {Baader, Franz and Buchheit, Martin and Jeusfeld, Manfred A.\n and Nutt, Werner},\n series = {Document},\n volume = {D-94-11},\n publisher = {DFKI},\n pages = {24--26},\n paddress = {Saarbrücken, Germany},\n pmonth = {November},\n caddress = {Saarbrücken, Germany},\n cyear = {1994},\n cmonth = {September~20--21},\n abstract = {In this paper I want to focus on some principal \n differences between data models of database systems and knowledge \n representation languages. \n\n The data manipulation languages of data models are based on the\n closed-world, unique-name, and domain-closure assumption.\n Data manipulation languages and query languages of\n knowledge representation formalisms differ considerably in their\n underlying assumptions. They are based on the open-world, unique-name, \n and open-domain assumption. \n That means, that even if the data definition language and the data\n manipulation language of a database management system and a knowledge\n base management system would coincide, the results of data\n manipulations would differ. \n\n I present some examples that show the usefulness\n of closed-world inferences in natural language processing. Thus\n knowledge representation languages sticking to the open-world\n assumption seem to be insufficient for natural language processing.}\n}","author_short":["Hustadt, U."],"author":["Hustadt, Ullrich"],"abstract":"In this paper I want to focus on some principal differences between data models of database systems and knowledge representation languages. The data manipulation languages of data models are based on the closed-world, unique-name, and domain-closure assumption. Data manipulation languages and query languages of knowledge representation formalisms differ considerably in their underlying assumptions. They are based on the open-world, unique-name, and open-domain assumption. That means, that even if the data definition language and the data manipulation language of a database management system and a knowledge base management system would coincide, the results of data manipulations would differ. I present some examples that show the usefulness of closed-world inferences in natural language processing. Thus knowledge representation languages sticking to the open-world assumption seem to be insufficient for natural language processing."},"bibtype":"inproceedings","biburl":"http://www.csc.liv.ac.uk/~ullrich/publications/uh-2013-08-06.bib","downloads":0,"title":"Do we need the closed-world assumption in knowledge representation","year":null,"dataSources":["p6py5bqMdg7vzjQS3"]}