Search (44 results, page 2 of 3)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Formale Begriffsanalyse"
  1. Wille, R.: Lattices in data analysis : how to draw them with a computer (1989) 0.00 
    0.003082376 = product of:
  0.01541188 = sum of:
    0.01541188 = weight(_text_:a in 3043) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01541188 = score(doc=3043,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.28826174 = fieldWeight in 3043, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3043)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Type
    a
  2. Ganter, B.; Stahl, J.; Wille, R.: Conceptual measurement and many-valued contexts (1986) 0.00 
    0.0026970792 = product of:
  0.013485395 = sum of:
    0.013485395 = weight(_text_:a in 3137) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013485395 = score(doc=3137,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.25222903 = fieldWeight in 3137, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3137)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Classification as a tool of research. Ed.: W. Gaul u. M. Schader
    Type
    a
  3. Vogt, F.; Wachter, C.; Wille, R.: Data analysis based on a conceptual file (1991) 0.00 
    0.0026970792 = product of:
  0.013485395 = sum of:
    0.013485395 = weight(_text_:a in 3140) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013485395 = score(doc=3140,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.25222903 = fieldWeight in 3140, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3140)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Type
    a
  4. Vogt, F.; Wille, R.: TOSCANA - a graphical tool for analyzing and exploring data (1995) 0.00 
    0.0026970792 = product of:
  0.013485395 = sum of:
    0.013485395 = weight(_text_:a in 595) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013485395 = score(doc=595,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.25222903 = fieldWeight in 595, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=595)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Type
    a
  5. Lex, W.: ¬A representation of concepts for their computerization (1987) 0.00 
    0.002669416 = product of:
  0.013347079 = sum of:
    0.013347079 = weight(_text_:a in 618) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013347079 = score(doc=618,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.24964198 = fieldWeight in 618, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=618)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    A lattice theoretical description of concept hierarchies is developed using for attributes the terms "given", "negated", "open" and "impossible" as the truth-values of a four-valued logic. Similar to the theory of B. Ganter and R. Wille so does this framework permit a precise representation of the usual interdependences in a field of related concepts - such as superconcepts, subconcept, contrary concepts etc. -, whenever the concepts under consideration can be sufficiently described by the presence or absence of certain attributes ...
    Type
    a
  6. Luksch, P.; Wille, R.: ¬A mathematical model for conceptual knowledge systems (1991) 0.00 
    0.0025228865 = product of:
  0.012614433 = sum of:
    0.012614433 = weight(_text_:a in 3033) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012614433 = score(doc=3033,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.23593865 = fieldWeight in 3033, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3033)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Objects, attributes, and concepts are basic notations of conceptual knowledge; they are linked by the following four basic relations: an object has an attribute, an object belongs to a concept, an attribute abstracts from a concept, and a concept is a subconcept of another concept. These structural elements are well mathematized in formal concept analysis. Therefore, conceptual knowledge systems can be mathematically modelled in the frame of formal concept analysis. How such modelling may be performed is indicated by an example of a conceptual knowledge system. The formal definition of the model finally clarifies in which ways representation, inference, acquisition, and communication of conceptual knowledge can be mathematically treated
    Type
    a
  7. Priss, U.: ¬A graphical interface for conceptually navigating faceted thesauri (1998) 0.00 
    0.0023357389 = product of:
  0.011678694 = sum of:
    0.011678694 = weight(_text_:a in 6658) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011678694 = score(doc=6658,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.21843673 = fieldWeight in 6658, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6658)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    This paper describes a graphical interface for the navigation and construction of faceted thesauri that is based on formal concept analysis. Each facet of a thesaurus is represented as a mathematical lattice that is further subdivided into components. Users can graphically navigate through the Java implementation of the interface by clicking on terms that connect facets and components. Since there are many applications for thesauri in the knowledge representation field, such a graphical interface has the potential of being very useful
    Type
    a
  8. Sowa, J.F.: Knowledge representation : logical, philosophical, and computational foundations (2000) 0.00 
    0.0022102704 = product of:
  0.011051352 = sum of:
    0.011051352 = product of:
      0.022102704 = sum of:
        0.022102704 = weight(_text_:information in 4360) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022102704 = score(doc=4360,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08139861 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046368346 = queryNorm
            0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 4360, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4360)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Theme
    Information
  9. Wille, R.: Line diagrams of hierarchical concept systems (1984) 0.00 
    0.0021795689 = product of:
  0.010897844 = sum of:
    0.010897844 = weight(_text_:a in 3040) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010897844 = score(doc=3040,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 3040, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3040)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Type
    a
  10. Wille, R.: Geometric representations of concept lattices (1989) 0.00 
    0.0021795689 = product of:
  0.010897844 = sum of:
    0.010897844 = weight(_text_:a in 3042) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010897844 = score(doc=3042,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 3042, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3042)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Type
    a
  11. Wille, R.: Concept lattices and conceptual knowledge systems (1992) 0.00 
    0.0021795689 = product of:
  0.010897844 = sum of:
    0.010897844 = weight(_text_:a in 3142) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010897844 = score(doc=3142,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 3142, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3142)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Type
    a
  12. Ganter, B.; Wille, R.: Conceptual scaling (1989) 0.00 
    0.0019071229 = product of:
  0.009535614 = sum of:
    0.009535614 = weight(_text_:a in 3138) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009535614 = score(doc=3138,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 3138, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3138)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Type
    a
  13. Kollewe, W.: Data representation by nested line diagrams illustrated by a survey of pensioners (1991) 0.00 
    0.0019071229 = product of:
  0.009535614 = sum of:
    0.009535614 = weight(_text_:a in 5230) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009535614 = score(doc=5230,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 5230, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5230)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    With formal concept analysis surveys are analyzable in the way that a meaningful picture of the answers of the interviewed persons is available. Line diagrams of large concept lattices might become less readable up to the point that it is impossible to pursue the line segments with the eyes. Nested line diagrams give the opportunity to overcome these difficulties. The main idea of nested line diagrams is to partition the line diagram into boxes so that line segments between two boxes are all parallel and may be replaced by one line segment. The possibility to draw line diagrams with more than two factors does allow it to describe concept lattices with many hundred or thousand concepts in a clear structure. In practice it has often been proven useful to take standardized scales for the single levels
    Type
    a
  14. Wille, R.: Knowledge acquisition by methods of formal concept analysis (1989) 0.00 
    0.0019071229 = product of:
  0.009535614 = sum of:
    0.009535614 = weight(_text_:a in 594) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009535614 = score(doc=594,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.17835285 = fieldWeight in 594, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=594)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Type
    a
  15. Sedelow, S.Y.; Sedelow, W.A.: Thesauri and concept-lattice semantic nets (1994) 0.00 
    0.0018875621 = product of:
  0.009437811 = sum of:
    0.009437811 = weight(_text_:a in 7733) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009437811 = score(doc=7733,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.17652355 = fieldWeight in 7733, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7733)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Formal concept lattices are a promising vehicle for the construction of rigorous and empirically accurate semantic nets. Presented here are results of initial experiments with concept lattices as representations of semantic relationships in the implicit structure of a large database (e.g. Roget's thesaurus)
    Type
    a
  16. Kent, R.E.: Implications and rules in thesauri (1994) 0.00 
    0.0018875621 = product of:
  0.009437811 = sum of:
    0.009437811 = weight(_text_:a in 3457) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009437811 = score(doc=3457,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.17652355 = fieldWeight in 3457, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3457)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    A central consideration in the study of whole language semantic space as encoded in thesauri is word sense comparability. Shows how word sense comparability can be adequately expressed by the logical implications and rules from Formal Concept Analysis. Formal concept analysis, a new approach to formal logic initiated by Rudolf Wille, has been used for data modelling, analysis and interpretation, and also for knowledge representation and knowledge discovery
    Type
    a
  17. Priss, U.: Comparing classification systems using facets (2000) 0.00 
    0.0018875621 = product of:
  0.009437811 = sum of:
    0.009437811 = weight(_text_:a in 6485) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009437811 = score(doc=6485,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.17652355 = fieldWeight in 6485, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6485)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    This paper describes a qualitative methodology for comparing and analyzing classification schemes. Theoretical facets are modeled as concept lattices in the sense of formal concept analysis and are used as 'ground' on which the underlying conceptual facets of a classification scheme are visually represented as 'figures'.
    Type
    a
  18. Ganter, B.: Computing with conceptual structures (2000) 0.00 
    0.0018276243 = product of:
  0.009138121 = sum of:
    0.009138121 = weight(_text_:a in 5088) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009138121 = score(doc=5088,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.1709182 = fieldWeight in 5088, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5088)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    We give an overview over the computational tools for conceptional structures that have emerged from the theory of Formal Concept Analysis, with emphasis on basic ideas rather than technical details. We describe what we mean by conceptual computations, and try to convince the reader that an elaborate formalization is a necessary precondition. Claiming that Formal Concept Analysis provides such a formal background, we present as examples two well known algorithms in very simple pseudo code. These earl be used for navigating in a lattice, thereby supporting some prototypical tasks of conceptual computation. We refer to some of the many more advanced methods, discuss how to compute with limited precision and explain why in the case of incomplete knowledge the conceptual approach is more efficient than a combinatorial one. Utilizing this efficiency requires skillful use of the formalism. We present two results that lead in this direction
    Type
    a
  19. Burmeister, P.; Holzer, R.: On the treatment of incomplete knowledge in formal concept analysis (2000) 0.00 
    0.0016346768 = product of:
  0.008173384 = sum of:
    0.008173384 = weight(_text_:a in 5085) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008173384 = score(doc=5085,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 5085, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5085)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Some possible treatments of incomplete knowledge in conceptual data representation, data analysis and knowledge acquisition are presented. In particular, some ways of conceptual scalings as well as the role of the three-valued KLEENE-logic are briefly investigated. This logic is also one background in attribute exploration, a conceptual tool for knowledge acquisition. For this method a strategy is given to obtain as much of (attribute) implicational knowledge about a given "universe" as possible; and we show how to represent incomplete knowledge in order to be able to pin down the questions still to be answered in order to obtain complete knowledge in this situation
    Type
    a
  20. Conceptual structures : logical, linguistic, and computational issues. 8th International Conference on Conceptual Structures, ICCS 2000, Darmstadt, Germany, August 14-18, 2000 (2000) 0.00 
    0.0014734776 = product of:
  0.007367388 = sum of:
    0.007367388 = weight(_text_:a in 691) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.007367388 = score(doc=691,freq=26.0), product of:
        0.053464882 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046368346 = queryNorm
        0.13779864 = fieldWeight in 691, product of:
          5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
            26.0 = termFreq=26.0
          1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=691)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Computer scientists create models of a perceived reality. Through AI techniques, these models aim at providing the basic support for emulating cognitive behavior such as reasoning and learning, which is one of the main goals of the Al research effort. Such computer models are formed through the interaction of various acquisition and inference mechanisms: perception, concept learning, conceptual clustering, hypothesis testing, probabilistic inference, etc., and are represented using different paradigms tightly linked to the processes that use them. Among these paradigms let us cite: biological models (neural nets, genetic programming), logic-based models (first-order logic, modal logic, rule-based systems), virtual reality models (object systems, agent systems), probabilistic models (Bayesian nets, fuzzy logic), linguistic models (conceptual dependency graphs, language-based rep resentations), etc. One of the strengths of the Conceptual Graph (CG) theory is its versatility in terms of the representation paradigms under which it falls. It can be viewed and therefore used, under different representation paradigms, which makes it a popular choice for a wealth of applications. Its full coupling with different cognitive processes lead to the opening of the field toward related research communities such as the Description Logic, Formal Concept Analysis, and Computational Linguistic communities. We now see more and more research results from one community enrich the other, laying the foundations of common philosophical grounds from which a successful synergy can emerge. ICCS 2000 embodies this spirit of research collaboration. It presents a set of papers that we believe, by their exposure, will benefit the whole community. For instance, the technical program proposes tracks on Conceptual Ontologies, Language, Formal Concept Analysis, Computational Aspects of Conceptual Structures, and Formal Semantics, with some papers on pragmatism and human related aspects of computing. Never before was the program of ICCS formed by so heterogeneously rooted theories of knowledge representation and use. We hope that this swirl of ideas will benefit you as much as it already has benefited us while putting together this program
    Content
    Concepts and Language: The Role of Conceptual Structure in Human Evolution (Keith Devlin) - Concepts in Linguistics - Concepts in Natural Language (Gisela Harras) - Patterns, Schemata, and Types: Author Support through Formalized Experience (Felix H. Gatzemeier) - Conventions and Notations for Knowledge Representation and Retrieval (Philippe Martin) - Conceptual Ontology: Ontology, Metadata, and Semiotics (John F. Sowa) - Pragmatically Yours (Mary Keeler) - Conceptual Modeling for Distributed Ontology Environments (Deborah L. McGuinness) - Discovery of Class Relations in Exception Structured Knowledge Bases (Hendra Suryanto, Paul Compton) - Conceptual Graphs: Perspectives: CGs Applications: Where Are We 7 Years after the First ICCS ? (Michel Chein, David Genest) - The Engineering of a CC-Based System: Fundamental Issues (Guy W. Mineau) - Conceptual Graphs, Metamodeling, and Notation of Concepts (Olivier Gerbé, Guy W. Mineau, Rudolf K. Keller) - Knowledge Representation and Reasonings: Based on Graph Homomorphism (Marie-Laure Mugnier) - User Modeling Using Conceptual Graphs for Intelligent Agents (James F. Baldwin, Trevor P. Martin, Aimilia Tzanavari) - Towards a Unified Querying System of Both Structured and Semi-structured Imprecise Data Using Fuzzy View (Patrice Buche, Ollivier Haemmerlé) - Formal Semantics of Conceptual Structures: The Extensional Semantics of the Conceptual Graph Formalism (Guy W. Mineau) - Semantics of Attribute Relations in Conceptual Graphs (Pavel Kocura) - Nested Concept Graphs and Triadic Power Context Families (Susanne Prediger) - Negations in Simple Concept Graphs (Frithjof Dau) - Extending the CG Model by Simulations (Jean-François Baget) - Contextual Logic and Formal Concept Analysis: Building and Structuring Description Logic Knowledge Bases: Using Least Common Subsumers and Concept Analysis (Franz Baader, Ralf Molitor) - On the Contextual Logic of Ordinal Data (Silke Pollandt, Rudolf Wille) - Boolean Concept Logic (Rudolf Wille) - Lattices of Triadic Concept Graphs (Bernd Groh, Rudolf Wille) - Formalizing Hypotheses with Concepts (Bernhard Ganter, Sergei 0. Kuznetsov) - Generalized Formal Concept Analysis (Laurent Chaudron, Nicolas Maille) - A Logical Generalization of Formal Concept Analysis (Sébastien Ferré, Olivier Ridoux) - On the Treatment of Incomplete Knowledge in Formal Concept Analysis (Peter Burmeister, Richard Holzer) - Conceptual Structures in Practice: Logic-Based Networks: Concept Graphs and Conceptual Structures (Peter W. Eklund) - Conceptual Knowledge Discovery and Data Analysis (Joachim Hereth, Gerd Stumme, Rudolf Wille, Uta Wille) - CEM - A Conceptual Email Manager (Richard Cole, Gerd Stumme) - A Contextual-Logic Extension of TOSCANA (Peter Eklund, Bernd Groh, Gerd Stumme, Rudolf Wille) - A Conceptual Graph Model for W3C Resource Description Framework (Olivier Corby, Rose Dieng, Cédric Hébert) - Computational Aspects of Conceptual Structures: Computing with Conceptual Structures (Bernhard Ganter) - Symmetry and the Computation of Conceptual Structures (Robert Levinson) An Introduction to SNePS 3 (Stuart C. Shapiro) - Composition Norm Dynamics Calculation with Conceptual Graphs (Aldo de Moor) - From PROLOG++ to PROLOG+CG: A CG Object-Oriented Logic Programming Language (Adil Kabbaj, Martin Janta-Polczynski) - A Cost-Bounded Algorithm to Control Events Generalization (Gaël de Chalendar, Brigitte Grau, Olivier Ferret)

Authors

Years

Types

  • a 38
  • m 5
  • s 2
  • el 1
  • r 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects