Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Location ontologies axiomatize the relationship between physical bodies and the space that they occupy, and there is a rich literature on the philosophical underpinnings of these ontologies. Existing location ontologies have given primacy to the structure of what might be called abstract space. Consequently, the spatial properties and relations between physical bodies are extracted from the spatial properties and relations of the spatial regions that they occupy. In this paper, we take a different approach by beginning with the philosophical position of mereological pluralism, in which there are different mereologies for different kinds of entities. In particular, we make the fundamental ontological commitment that the mereology for spatial regions is different than the mereology for physical bodies. Different intuitions about location and different classes of physical bodies can be formally specified by imposing different conditions on this mapping, thus leading to different possible location ontologies. We propose an axiomatization of a location ontology and characterize the models of the axiomatization, up to isomorphism, by providing a representation theorem with respect to graph and poset homomorphisms.

Keywords

Mereotopology location parthood ontology verification

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aameri, B. (2012). Using partial automorphisms to design process ontologies. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems (pp. 309–322). IOS Press.

Aameri, B. & Gruninger, M. (2015). A new look at ontology correctness. In 2015 AAAI Spring Symposium Series. AAAI Press.

Aameri, B. & Gruninger, M. (2017). Encountering the physical world. In Proceedings of the Joint Ontology Workshops 2017.

Aameri, B., Grüninger, M. & Chui, C. (2016). Anti-modules. In Proceedings of the Joint Ontology Workshops (JOWO at FOIS). CEUR Workshop Proceedings (Vol. 1660).

Asher, N. & Vieu, L. (1995). Toward a geometry of common sense: A semantics and a complete axiomatization of mereotopology. In IJCAI (pp. 846–852).

Baumann, R., Loebe, F. & Herre, H. (2016). Towards an ontology of space for GFO. In FOIS2016 (pp. 53–66).

Borgo, S., Guarino, N. & Masolo, C. (1997). An ontological theory of physical objects. In Proceedings of Qualitative Reasoning 11th International Workshop (pp. 223–231).

Casati, R. & Varzi, A. (1999). Parts and Places: The Structures of Spatial Representation. MIT Press.

Cohn, A.G., Bennett, B., Gooday, J. & Gotts, N. (1997). RCC: A calculus for region-based qualitative spatial reasoning. GeoInformatica, 1, 275–316. doi:10.1023/A:1009712514511.

10.

Donnelly, M., Bittner, T. & Rosse, C. (2006). A formal theory for spatial representation and reasoning in biomedical ontologies. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, 36(1), 1–27. doi:10.1016/j.artmed.2005.07.004.

11.

Gilmore, C. (2017). Location and mereology. In

E.N.

Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, fall 2017 edition.

12.

Gotts, N.M. (1996). Formalising commonsense topology: The INCH calculus. In Proc. Fourth International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence and Mathematics.

13.

Grüninger, M. & Aameri, B. (2017). A new perspective on the mereotopology of RCC8. In Proceeding of the 13th International Conference on Spatial Information Theory (COSIT 2017). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (pp. 2:1–2:13).

14.

Gruninger, M., Hahmann, T., Hashemi, A. & Ong, D. (2010). Ontology verification with repositories. In Proc. of the 6th Int. Conference on Formal Ontologies in Information Systems (FOIS2010) (pp. 317–330). IOS Press.

15.

Gruninger, M., Hahmann, T., Hashemi, A., Ong, D. & Ozgovde, A. (2012). Modular first-order ontologies via repositories. Applied Ontology, 7(2), 169–209. doi:10.3233/AO-2012-0106.

16.

Hahmann, T. (2013). A reconciliation of logical representations of space: From multidimensional mereotopology to geometry. PhD thesis, Univ. of Toronto, Dept. of Comp. Science.

17.

Lehmkuhl, D. (2018). The metaphysics of super-substantivalism. Noûs, 52(1), 24–46.

18.

Leonard, M. (2016). What is mereological harmony? Synthese, 193, 1949–1965.

19.

Lewis, D. (1991). Parts of Classes. Blackwell.

20.

Markosian, N. (2014). A spatial approach to mereology. In

Kleinschmidt (Ed.), Mereology and Location. Oxford University Press.

21.

McDaniel, K. (2004). Modal realism with overlap. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 82, 137–152. doi:10.1080/713659792.

22.

McDaniel, K. (2007). Extended simples. Philosophical Studies, 133, 131–141. doi:10.1007/s11098-006-9010-y.

23.

McKeon, R. (2009). The Basic Works of Aristotle. Modern Library.

24.

Muller, P. (2002). Topological spatio-temporal reasoning and representation. Computational Intelligence, 18(3), 420–450. doi:10.1111/1467-8640.00196.

25.

Parsons, J. (2007). Theories of location. Oxford Studies in Metaphysics, 3, 201–232.

26.

Pease, A., Niles, I. & Li, J. (2002). The suggested upper merged ontology: A large ontology for the semantic web and its applications. In Working Notes of the AAAI-2002 Workshop on Ontologies and the Semantic Web (Vol. 28).

27.

Randell, D.A., Cui, Z. & Cohn, A. (1992). A spatial logic based on regions and connection. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (pp. 165–176). San Mateo, California: Morgan Kaufmann.

28.

Saucedo, R. (2011). Parthood of location. Oxford Studies in Metaphysics, 6, 225–294. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199603039.003.0008.

29.

Schaffer, J. (2009). Spacetime the one substance. Philosophical Studies, 145, 131–148. doi:10.1007/s11098-009-9386-6.

30.

Schröder, B. (2003). Ordered Sets: An Introduction. Springer.

31.

Sider, T. (2007). Parthood. Philosophical Review, 116, 51–91. doi:10.1215/00318108-2006-022.

32.

Sklar, L. (1974). Space, Time, and Spacetime. University of California Press.

33.

Stell, J.G. (2000). Boolean connection algebras: A new approach to the region-connection calculus. Artificial Intelligence, 122, 111–136. doi:10.1016/S0004-3702(00)00045-X.

34.

Stell, J.G. & West, M. (2004). A four-dimensionalist mereotopology. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems (pp. 261–272).

35.

Uzquiano, G. (2011). Mereological harmony. Oxford Studies in Metaphysics, 6, 199–224. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199603039.003.0007.

Location ontologies based on mereotopological pluralism

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References