Overview

This workshop is the joint continuation of the previous Workshop on Cognitive Aspects of KR (CAKR) and of the Workshop on Knowledge Diversity (KoDis). In view of partial overlap of topics and target audience, we organise the KoDis and CAKR workshops jointly this year.

News

• The talks of this workshop will be given as part of the NMR programme on November 4, 2024.
• We accepted two papers for the workshop.

KoDis

The KoDis workshop intends to create a space of confluence and a forum for discussion for researchers interested in knowledge diversity in a wide sense, including diversity in terms of diverging perspectives, different beliefs, semantic heterogeneity and others. The importance of understanding and handling the different forms of diversity that manifest between knowledge formalisations (ontologies, knowledge bases, or knowledge graphs) is widely recognised and has led to the proposal of a variety of systems of representation, tackling overlapping aspects of this phenomenon.

Besides understanding the phenomenon and considering formal models for the representation of knowledge diversity, we are interested in the variety of reasoning problems that emerge in this context, including joint reasoning with possibly conflicting sources, interpreting knowledge from alternative viewpoints, consolidating the diversity as uncertainty, reasoning by means of argumentation between the sources and pursuing knowledge aggregations among others.

CAKR

The CAKR workshop deals with cognitively adequate approaches to knowledge representation and reasoning. Knowledge representation is a lively and well-established field of AI, where knowledge and belief are represented declaratively and suitable for machine processing. It is often claimed that this declarative nature makes knowledge representation cognitively more adequate than e.g. sub-symbolic approaches, such as machine learning. This cognitive adequacy has important ramifications for the explainability of approaches in knowledge representation, which on its turn is essential for the trustworthiness of these approaches. However, exactly how cognitive adequacy is ensured has been often left implicit, and connections with cognitive science and psychology are only recently being taken up.