Applying Formal Concept Analysis To Validate Expanded Concept Types

• US 20100121884A1
• Filed: 11/07/2008
• Published: 05/13/2010
• Est. Priority Date: 11/07/2008
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Forcepoint Federal Holdings LLC (Forcepoint LLC)
• Original Assignee: Raytheon Company (Rtx Corporation)
• Inventors: Smith, Jonathon P., Peoples, Bruce E., Johnson, Michael R.
• Granted Patent: US 8,386,489 B2
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 707/794
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 16/3344 using natural language analysis

Abstract

According to one embodiment, attributes associated with a concept type of a query conceptual graph are received. A potentially conceptually similar term is received from an onomasticon. The potentially conceptually similar term is validated according to the attributes. According to another embodiment, attributes associated with a concept type of a document conceptual graph are received. A potentially conceptually similar term is received from an onomasticon. The potentially conceptually similar term is validated according to the attributes.

Claims

1. A method comprising:

receiving a plurality of attributes associated with a concept type of a query conceptual graph stored in a computer-readable medium;

receiving a potentially conceptually similar term from an onomasticon; and

validating, by an apparatus, the potentially conceptually similar term according to the plurality of attributes.

2. The method of claim 1, the validating further comprising:

determining if the plurality of attributes map to the potentially conceptually similar term; and

determining that the potentially conceptually similar term is validated if the plurality of attributes map to the potentially conceptually similar term.

3. The method of claim 1, further comprising:

reporting that the potentially conceptually similar term is not validated to initiate removal of the potentially conceptually similar term from the onomasticon.

4. The method of claim 1, further comprising:

determining that the potentially conceptually similar term is validated; and

reporting the potentially conceptually similar term to a graph matcher.

5. The method of claim 1, further comprising:

determining whether the potentially conceptually similar term is validated;

if the potentially conceptually similar term is validated, reporting the potentially conceptually similar term to a graph matcher; and

if the potentially conceptually similar term is not validated, initiating removal of the potentially conceptually similar term from the onomasticon.

6. A computer-readable medium having computer-executable instructions, when executed by a computer configured to:

receive a plurality of attributes associated with a concept type of a query conceptual graph;

receive a potentially conceptually similar term from an onomasticon; and

validate the potentially conceptually similar term according to the plurality of attributes.

7. The computer-readable medium of claim 6, the instructions further configured to validate by:

determining if the plurality of attributes map to the potentially conceptually similar term; and

determining that the potentially conceptually similar term is validated if the plurality of attributes map to the potentially conceptually similar term.

8. The computer-readable medium of claim 6, the instructions further configured to:

report that the potentially conceptually similar term is not validated to initiate removal of the potentially conceptually similar term from the onomasticon.

9. The computer-readable medium of claim 6, the instructions further configured to:

determine that the potentially conceptually similar term is validated; and

report the potentially conceptually similar term to a graph matcher.

10. The computer-readable medium of claim 6, the instructions further configured to:

determine whether the potentially conceptually similar term is validated;

if the potentially conceptually similar term is validated, report the potentially conceptually similar term to a graph matcher; and

if the potentially conceptually similar term is not validated, initiate removal of the potentially conceptually similar term from the onomasticon.

11. A method comprising:

receiving a plurality of attributes associated with a concept type of a document conceptual graph stored in a computer-readable medium;

receiving a potentially conceptually similar term from an onomasticon; and

validating, by an apparatus, the potentially conceptually similar term according to the plurality of attributes.

12. The method of claim 11, the validating further comprising:

determining if the plurality of attributes map to the potentially conceptually similar term; and

determining that the potentially conceptually similar term is validated if the plurality of attributes map to the potentially conceptually similar term.

13. The method of claim 11, further comprising:

reporting that the potentially conceptually similar term is not validated to initiate removal of the potentially conceptually similar term from the onomasticon.

14. The method of claim 11, further comprising:

determining that the potentially conceptually similar term is validated; and

reporting the potentially conceptually similar term to a graph matcher.

15. The method of claim 11, further comprising:

determining whether the potentially conceptually similar term is validated;

if the potentially conceptually similar term is validated, reporting the potentially conceptually similar term to a graph matcher; and

if the potentially conceptually similar term is not validated, initiating removal of the potentially conceptually similar term from the onomasticon.

16. A computer-readable medium having computer-executable instructions, when executed by a computer configured to:

receive a plurality of attributes associated with a concept type of a document conceptual graph;

receive a potentially conceptually similar term from an onomasticon; and

validate the potentially conceptually similar term according to the plurality of attributes.

17. The computer-readable medium of claim 16, the instructions further configured to validate by:

determining if the plurality of attributes map to the potentially conceptually similar term; and

determining that the potentially conceptually similar term is validated if the plurality of attributes map to the potentially conceptually similar term.

18. The computer-readable medium of claim 16, the instructions further configured to:

report that the potentially conceptually similar term is not validated to initiate removal of the potentially conceptually similar term from the onomasticon.

19. The computer-readable medium of claim 16, the instructions further configured to:

determine that the potentially conceptually similar term is validated; and

report the potentially conceptually similar term to a graph matcher.

20. The computer-readable medium of claim 16, the instructions further configured to:

determine whether the potentially conceptually similar term is validated;

if the potentially conceptually similar term is validated, report the potentially conceptually similar term to a graph matcher; and

if the potentially conceptually similar term is not validated, initiate removal of the potentially conceptually similar term from the onomasticon.