Journal of Automated Reasoning

, Volume 53, Issue 1, pp 1–61 | Cite as

The Incredible ELK

From Polynomial Procedures to Efficient Reasoning with \(\mathcal {E} \mathcal {L}\) Ontologies
  • Yevgeny Kazakov
  • Markus Krötzsch
  • František Simančík
Article

Abstract

\(\mathcal {E} \mathcal {L}\) is a simple tractable Description Logic that features conjunctions and existential restrictions. Due to its favorable computational properties and relevance to existing ontologies, \(\mathcal {E} \mathcal {L}\) has become the language of choice for terminological reasoning in biomedical applications, and has formed the basis of the OWL EL profile of the Web ontology language OWL. This paper describes ELK—a high performance reasoner for OWL EL ontologies—and details various aspects from theory to implementation that make ELK one of the most competitive reasoning systems for \(\mathcal {E} \mathcal {L}\) ontologies available today.

Keywords

Description logics Implementation and optimization techniques Saturation procedures Concurrency 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Abiteboul, S., Hull, R., Vianu, V.: Foundations of Databases. Addison Wesley (1994)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Amir, E., McIlraith, S.A.: Partition-based logical reasoning for first-order and propositional theories. Artif. Intell. 162(1–2), 49–88 (2005)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Armas Romero, A., Cuenca Grau, B., Horrocks, I.: MORe: Modular combination of OWL reasoners for ontology classification. In: Cudré-Mauroux, P., Heflin, J., Sirin, E., Tudorache, T., Euzenat, J., Hauswirth, M., Parreira, J.X., Hendler, J., Schreiber, G., Bernstein, A., Blomqvist, E. (eds.) Proceedings of the 11th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWCŠ12), LNCS, vol. 7649, pp. 1–16. Springer (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Aslani, M., Haarslev, V.: Parallel TBox classification in description logics – first experimental results. In: Coelho, H., Studer, R., Wooldridge, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the 19th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI’10), Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 215, pp. 485–490. IOS Press (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Aslani, M., Haarslev, V.: Concurrent classification of OWL ontologies – an empirical evaluation. In: Kazakov, Y., Lembo, D., Wolter, F. (eds.) Proceedings of the 25th International Workshop on Description Logics (DL’12), CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol 846, pp. 400–410. CEUR-WS.org (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Baader, F.: Terminological cycles in a description logic with existential restrictions. In: Gottlob, G., Walsh, T. (eds.) Proceedings of the 18th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI’03), pp. 325–330. Morgan Kaufmann (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Baader, F., Borgwardt, S., Morawska, B.: Extending unification in \(\mathcal {EL}\) towards general TBoxes. In: Brewka, G., Eiter, T., McIlraith, S.A. (eds.) Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR’12), pp. 568–572. AAAI Press (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Baader, F., Brandt, S., Lutz, C.: Pushing the \(\mathcal {EL}\) envelope. In: Kaelbling, L., Saffiotti, A. (eds.) Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI’05), pp. 364–369. Professional Book Center (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Baader, F., Brandt, S., Lutz, C.: Pushing the \(\mathcal {EL}\) envelope further. In: Clark, K.G., Patel-Schneider, P.F. (eds.) Proceedings in OWLED 2008 DC Workshop on OWL: Experiences and Directions, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol 496. CEUR-WS.org (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Baader, F., Calvanese, D., McGuinness, D., Nardi, D., Patel-Schneider, P. (eds.): The Description Logic Handbook, Theory, Implementation, and Applications, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Baader, F., Franconi, E., Hollunder, B., Nebel, B., Profitlich, H.J.: An empirical analysis of optimization techniques for terminological representation systems. Appl. Intell. 4(2), 109–132 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Baader, F., Küsters, R., Molitor, R.: Computing least common subsumers in description logics with existential restrictions. In: Dean, T. (ed.) Proceedings of the 16th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI’99), pp. 96–103. Morgan Kaufmann (1999)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Baader, F., Lutz, C., Suntisrivaraporn, B.: Is tractable reasoning in extensions of the description logic \(\mathcal {EL}\) useful in practice? In: Proceedings of the 2005 international workshop on methods for modalities (M4M’05) (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Baader, F., Lutz, C., Suntisrivaraporn, B.: CEL—a polynomial-time reasoner for life science ontologies. In: Furbach, U., Shankar, N. (eds.) Proceedings of the 3rd International Joint Conference on Automated Reasoning (IJCAR’06), LNCS, vol 4130, pp. 287–291. Springer (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Baader, F., Lutz, C., Suntisrivaraporn, B.: Efficient reasoning in \(\mathcal {EL}^+\). In: Parsia, B., Sattler, U., Toman, D. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2006 International Workshop on Description Logics (DL’06), CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 189. CEUR-WS.org (2006)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Baader, F., Peñaloza, R.: Automata-based axiom pinpointing. J. Autom. Reason. 45(2), 91–129 (2010)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Baader, F., Sertkaya, B., Turhan, A.Y.: Computing the least common subsumer w.r.t. a background terminology. J. Appl. Logics 5(3), 392–420 (2007)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bachmair, L., Ganzinger, H.: Resolution theorem proving. In: Robinson, J.A., Voronkov, A. (eds.) Handbook of Automated Reasoning, pp. 19–99. Elsevier and MIT Press (2001)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bergmann, F.W., Quantz, J.: Parallelizing description logics. In: Wachsmuth, I., Rollinger, C.R., Brauer, W. (eds.) Proceedings of the 19th Annual German Conference on Artificial Intelligence (KI’95), vol. 981, pp. 137–148. LNCS, Springer (1995)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bozzato, L., Homola, M., Serafini, L.: Towards more effective tableaux reasoning for CKR. In: Kazakov, Y., Lembo, D., Wolter, F. (eds.) Proceedings of the 25th International Workshop on Description Logics (DL’12), CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol 846, pp. 114–124. CEUR-WS.org (2012)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Brandt, S.: On subsumption and instance problem in \(\mathcal {ELH}\) w.r.t. general TBoxes. In: Haarslev, V., Möller, R. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2004 International Workshop on Description Logics (DL’04), CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol 104. CEUR-WS.org (2004)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Brandt, S.: Polynomial time reasoning in a description logic with existential restrictions, GCI axioms, and – What else? In: de Mántaras, R.L., Saitta, L. (eds.) Proceedings of the 16th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI’04), pp. 298–302. IOS Press (2004)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Brandt, S.: Standard and Non-standard Reasoning in Description Logics. Ph.D. thesis, Technische Universität Dresden, Germany (2006)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Brickley, D., Guha, R.V. (eds.): RDF Vocabulary Description Language 1.0: RDF Schema. W3C Recommendation (10 February 2004). Available at http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/
  25. 25.
    Calvanese, D., Giacomo, G.D., Lembo, D., Lenzerini, M., Rosati, R.: Tractable reasoning and efficient query answering in description logics: The DL-Lite family. J. Autom. Reason. 39(3), 385–429 (2007)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cuenca Grau, B., Halaschek-Wiener, C., Kazakov, Y., Suntisrivaraporn, B.: Incremental classification of description logics ontologies. J. Autom. Reason. 44(4), 337–369 (2010)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Cuenca Grau, B., Horrocks, I., Kazakov, Y., Sattler, U.: Modular reuse of ontologies: Theory and practice. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 31, 273–318 (2008)MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Day-Richter, J. (ed.): The OBO Flat File Format Specification, version 1.2. The Gene Ontology Consortium. Available at http://www.geneontology.org/GO.format.obo-1_2.shtml (2006)
  29. 29.
    Delaitre, V., Kazakov, Y.: Classifying \(\mathcal {ELH}\) ontologies in SQL databases. In: Patel-Schneider, P.F., Hoekstra, R. (eds.) Proceedings in OWLED 2009 Workshop on OWL: Experiences and Directions, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 529. CEUR-WS.org (2009)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Dowling, W.F., Gallier, J.H.: Linear-time algorithms for testing the satisfiability of propositional Horn formulae. J. Logic Program. 1(3), 267–284 (1984)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Eiter, T., Krennwallner, T., Schneider, P., Xiao, G.: Uniform evaluation of nonmonotonic DL-programs. In: Lukasiewicz, T., Sali, A. (eds.) Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Foundations of Information and Knowledge Systems (FoIKS’12), vol. 7153, pp. 1–22. LNCS, Springer (2012)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Forgy, C.: Rete: A fast algorithm for the many pattern/many object pattern match problem. Artif. Intell. 19, 17–37 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Gkoutos, G.V., Schofield, P.N., Hoehndorf, R.: Computational tools for comparative phenomics: The role and promise of ontologies. Mamm. Genome 23(9–10), 669–679 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Glimm, B., Horrocks, I., Motik, B., Shearer, R., Stoilos, G.: A novel approach to ontology classification. J. Web Sem. 14, 84–101 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Grimm, S., Watzke, M., Hubauer, T., Cescolini, F.: Embedded \(\mathcal {EL}^+\) reasoning on programmable logic controllers. In: Cudré-Mauroux, P., Heflin, J., Sirin, E., Tudorache, T., Euzenat, J., Hauswirth, M., Parreira, J.X., Hendler, J., Schreiber, G., Bernstein, A., Blomqvist, E. (eds.) Proceedings of the 11th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC’12), vol 7649, pp. 66–81. LNCS, Springer (2012)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Haarslev, V., Möller, R.: Racer system description. In: Goré, R., Leitsch, A., Nipkow, T. (eds.) Proceedings of the 1st International Joint Conference on Automated Reasoning (IJCAR’01), vol. 2083, pp. 701–705. LNCS, Springer (2001)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Harris, M.A., Lock, A., Bühler, J., Oliver, S.G., Wood, V.: FYPO: The fission yeast phenotype ontology. Bioinforma. 29(13), 1671–1678 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Heino, N., Pan, J.Z.: RDFS reasoning on massively parallel hardware. In: Cudré-Mauroux, P., Heflin, J., Sirin, E., Tudorache, T., Euzenat, J., Hauswirth, M., Parreira, J.X., Hendler, J., Schreiber, G., Bernstein, A., Blomqvist, E. (eds.) Proceedings of the 11th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC’12), vol. 7649, pp. 133–148. LNCS, Springer (2012)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hoehndorf, R., Dumontier, M., Gkoutos, G.V.: Identifying aberrant pathways through integrated analysis of knowledge in pharmacogenomics. Bioinforma. 28(16), 2169–2175 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Hoehndorf, R., Harris, M.A., Herre, H., Rustici, G., Gkoutos, G.V.: Semantic integration of physiology phenotypes with an application to the cellular phenotype ontology. Bioinforma. 28(13), 1783–1789 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Hofmann, M.: Proof-theoretic approach to description-logic. In: Proceedings of the 20th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS’05), pp. 229–237. IEEE Computer Society (2005)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Hogan, A., Harth, A., Polleres, A.: Scalable authoritative OWL reasoning for the Web. Int. J. Semant. Web Inf. Syst. 5(2), 49–90 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Hogan, A., Pan, J.Z., Polleres, A., Decker, S.: SAOR: template rule optimisations for distributed reasoning over 1 billion linked data triples. In: Patel-Schneider, P.F., Pan, Y., Glimm, B., Hitzler, P., Mika, P., Pan, J., Horrocks, I. (eds.) Proceedings of the 9th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC’10), vol. 6496, pp. 337–353. LNCS, Springer (2010)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Horridge, M., Bechhofer, S.: The OWL API: A Java API for working with OWL 2 ontologies. In: Patel-Schneider, P.F., Hoekstra, R. (eds.) Proceedings in OWLED 2009 Workshop on OWL: Experiences and Directions, vol. 529. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CEUR-WS.org (2009)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Horrocks, I., Kutz, O., Sattler, U.: The even more irresistible \(\mathcal {SROIQ}\). In: Doherty, P., Mylopoulos, J., Welty, C.A. (eds.) Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR’06), pp. 57–67. AAAI Press (2006)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Horrocks, I., Sattler, U., Tobies, S.: Practical reasoning for expressive description logics. In: Ganzinger, H., McAllester, D.A., Voronkov, A. (eds.) Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Logic Programming and Automated Reasoning (LPAR’99), vol. 1705, pp. 161–180. LNCS, Springer (1999)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    ter Horst, H.J.: Completeness, decidability and complexity of entailment for RDF Schema and a semantic extension involving the OWL vocabulary. J. Web Semant. 3(2–3), 79–115 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Jupp, S., Stevens, R., Hoehndorf, R.: Logical gene ontology annotations (GOAL): exploring gene ontology annotations with OWL. J. Biomed. Semant. 3(Suppl 1)(S3), 1–16 (2012)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Kalyanpur, A., Parsia, B., Horridge, M., Sirin, E.: Finding all justifications of OWL DL entailments. In: Aberer, K., Choi, K.S., Noy, N., Allemang, D., Lee, K.I., Nixon, L., Golbeck, J., Mika, P., Maynard, D., Mizoguchi, R., Schreiber, G., Cudré-Mauroux, P. (eds.) Proceedings of the 6th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC’07), vol. 4825, pp. 267–280. LNCS, Springer (2007)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Kazakov, Y.: \(\mathcal {RIQ}\) and \(\mathcal {SROIQ}\) are harder than \(\mathcal {SHOIQ}\). In: Brewka, G., Lang, J. (eds.) Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR’08), pp. 274–284. AAAI Press (2008)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Kazakov, Y.: Consequence-driven reasoning for Horn \(\mathcal {SHIQ}\) ontologies. In: Boutilier, C. (ed.) Proceedings of the 21st International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI’09), pp. 2040–2045. IJCAI (2009)Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Kazakov, Y., Klinov, P.: Incremental reasoning in OWL EL without bookkeeping. Int. Semant. Web Conf. 1, 232–247 (2013). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-41335-3_15 Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Kazakov, Y., Krötzsch, M., Simančík, F.: Concurrent classification of \(\mathcal {EL}\) ontologies. In: Aroyo, L., Welty, C., Alani, H., Taylor, J., Bernstein, A., Kagal, L., Noy, N., Blomqvist, E. (eds.) Proceedings of the 10th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC’11), vol. 7032, pp. 305–320. LNCS, Springer (2011)Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Kazakov, Y., Krötzsch, M., Simančík, F.: Unchain my \(\mathcal {EL}\) reasoner. In: Rosati, R., Rudolph, S., Zakharyaschev, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the 24th International Workshop on Description Logics (DL’11), vol. 745, pp. 202–212. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CEUR-WS.org (2011)Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Kazakov, Y., Krötzsch, M., Simančík, F.: ELK reasoner: architecture and evaluation. In: Horrocks, I., Yatskevich, M., Jimenez-Ruiz, E. (eds.) Proceedings of the OWL Reasoner Evaluation Workshop 2012 (ORE’12), vol. 858. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CEUR-WS.org (2012)Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Kazakov, Y., Krötzsch, M., Simančík, F.: Practical reasoning with nominals in the \(\mathcal {EL}\) family of description logics. In: Brewka, G., Eiter, T., McIlraith, S.A. (eds.) Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR’12), pp. 264–274. AAAI Press (2012)Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Knublauch, H., Fergerson, R.W., Noy, N.F., Musen, M.A.: The Protégé OWL Plugin: an open development environment for Semantic Web applications. In: McIlraith, S.A., Plexousakis, D., van Harmelen, F. (eds.) Proceedings of the 3rd International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC’04), vol. 3298, pp. 229–243. LNCS, Springer (2004)Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Kontchakov, R., Lutz, C., Toman, D., Wolter, F., Zakharyaschev, M.: The combined approach to ontology-based data access. In: Walsh, T. (ed.) Proceedings of the 22nd International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI’11), pp. 2656–2661. AAAI Press/IJCAI (2011)Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Kotoulas, S., Oren, E., van Harmelen, F.: Mind the data skew: distributed inferencing by speeddating in elastic regions. In: Proceedings in 19th international conference on world wide web (WWW’10), pp. 531–540. WWW’10, ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Krötzsch, M.: Efficient rule-based inferencing for OWL EL. In: Walsh, T. (ed.) Proceedings of the 22nd International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI’11), pp. 2668–2673. AAAI Press/IJCAI (2011)Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Krötzsch, M.: The not-so-easy task of computing class subsumptions in OWL RL. In: Cudré-Mauroux, P., Heflin, J., Sirin, E., Tudorache, T., Euzenat, J., Hauswirth, M., Parreira, J.X., Hendler, J., Schreiber, G., Bernstein, A., Blomqvist, E. (eds.) Proceedings of the 11th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC’12), vol. 7649, pp. 279–294. LNCS, Springer (2012)Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Krötzsch, M.: OWL 2 Profiles: an introduction to lightweight ontology languages. In: Eiter, T., Krennwallner, T. (eds.) Proceedings of the 8th Reasoning Web Summer School, Vienna, Austria, September 3–8 2012, vol. 7487, pp. 112–183. LNCS, Springer (2012)Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Krötzsch, M., Mehdi, A., Rudolph, S.: Orel: Database-driven reasoning for OWL 2 profiles. In: Haarslev, V., Toman, D., Weddell, G. (eds.) Proceedings of the 23rd International Workshop on Description Logics (DL’10), vol. 573, pp. 114–124. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CEUR-WS.org (2010)Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Krötzsch, M., Rudolph, S., Hitzler, P.: Conjunctive queries for a tractable fragment of OWL 1.1. In: Aberer, K., Choi, K.S., Noy, N., Allemang, D., Lee, K.I., Nixon, L., Golbeck, J., Mika, P., Maynard, D., Mizoguchi, R., Schreiber, G., Cudré-Mauroux, P. (eds.) Proceedings of the 6th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC’07), vol. 4825, pp. 310–323. LNCS, Springer (2007)Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Krötzsch, M., Simančík, F., Horrocks, I.: A description logic primer. CoRR abs/1201.4089 (2012)Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Lawley, M.J., Bousquet, C.: Fast classification in Protégé: Snorocket as an OWL 2 EL reasoner. In: Taylor, K., Meyer, T., Orgun, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the 6th Australasian Ontology Workshop (IAOA’10), vol. 122, pp. 45–49. Conferences in Research and Practice in Information Technology, Australian Computer Society Inc (2010)Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Liebig, T., Müller, F.: Parallelizing tableaux-based description logic reasoning. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z., Herrero, P. (eds.) Proceedings of OTM workshops 2007, Part II, vol. 4806, pp. 1135–1144. LNCS, Springer (2007)Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Lusk, E.L., McCune, W., Slaney, J.K.: Roo: a parallel theorem prover. In: Kapur, D. (ed.) Proceedings of the 11th Conference on Automated Deduction (CADE’92), vol. 607, pp. 731–734. LNCS, Springer (1992)Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Magka, D., Kazakov, Y., Horrocks, I.: Tractable extensions of the description logic \(\mathcal {EL}\) with numerical datatypes. J. Autom. Reason. 47(4), 427–450 (2011)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Meissner, A.: Experimental analysis of some computation rules in a simple parallel reasoning system for the \(\mathcal {ALC}\) description logic. Int. J. Appl. Math. Comput. Sci. 21(1), 83–95 (2011)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Mendez, J.: jcel: a modular rule-based reasoner. In: Horrocks, I., Yatskevich, M., Jimenez-Ruiz, E. (eds.) Proceedings of the OWL Reasoner Evaluation Workshop 2012 (ORE’12), vol. 858. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CEUR-WS.org (2012)Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Mendez, J., Ecke, A., Turhan, A.Y.: Implementing completion-based inferences for the \(\mathcal {EL}\)-family. In: Rosati, R., Rudolph, S., Zakharyaschev, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the 24th International Workshop on Description Logics (DL’11), vol. 745, pp. 34–344. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CEUR-WS.org (2011)Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Mendez, J., Suntisrivaraporn, B.: Reintroducing CEL as an OWL 2 EL reasoner. In: Grau, B.C., Horrocks, I., Motik, B., Sattler, U. (eds.) Proceedings of the 22nd International Workshop on Description Logics (DL’09), vol. 477. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CEUR-WS.org (2009)Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Möller, R., Haarslev, V., Wandelt, S.: The revival of structural subsumption in tableau-based reasoners. In: Baader, F., Lutz, C., Motik, B. (eds.) Proceedings of the 21st International Workshop on Description logics (DL’08), vol. 353. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CEUR-WS.org (2008)Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Motik, B., Cuenca Grau, B., Horrocks, I., Wu, Z., Fokoue, A., Lutz, C. (eds.): OWL 2 Web Ontology Language: Profiles. W3C Recommendation (27 October 2009). Available at http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-profiles/
  76. 76.
    Motik, B., Shearer, R., Horrocks, I.: Hypertableau reasoning for description logics. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 36, 165–228 (2009)MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Mutharaju, R., Maier, F., Hitzler, P.: A MapReduce algorithm for \(\mathcal {EL}^+\). In: Haarslev, V., Toman, D., Weddell, G. (eds.) Proceedings of the 23rd International Workshop on Description Logics (DL’10), vol. 573, pp. 464–474. CEUR Workshop proceedings, CEUR-WS.org (2010)Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Narayanan, S., Çatalyürek, Ü.V., Kurç, T.M., Saltz, J.H.: Parallel materialization of large ABoxes. In: Shin, S.Y., Ossowski, S. (eds.) Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC’09), pp. 1257–1261. ACM (2009)Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Nikitina, N., Rudolph, S.: ExpExpExplosion: uniform interpolation in general \(\mathcal {EL}\) terminologies. In: Raedt, L.D., Bessière, C., Dubois, D., Doherty, P., Frasconi, P., Heintz, F., Lucas, P.J.F. (eds.) Proceedings of the 20th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI’12), vol. 242, pp. 618–623. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, IOS Press (2012)Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Ortiz, M., Rudolph, S., Simkus, M.: Worst-case optimal reasoning for the Horn-DL fragments of OWL 1 and 2. In: Lin, F., Sattler, U., Truszczynski, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR’10), pp. 269–279. AAAI Press (2010)Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Osumi-Sutherland, D., Reeve, S., Mungall, C.J., Neuhaus, F., Ruttenberg, A., Jefferis, G.S.X.E., Armstrong, J.D.: A strategy for building neuroanatomy ontologies. Bioinforma. 28(9), 1262–1269 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    OWL Working Group, W.: OWL 2 web ontology language: document overview. W3C Recommendation (27 October 2009). Available at http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-overview/
  83. 83.
    Peñaloza, R., Sertkaya, B.: On the complexity of axiom pinpointing in the \(\mathcal {EL}\) family of description logics. In: Lin, F., Sattler, U., Truszczynski, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR’10), pp. 280–289. AAAI Press (2010)Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Rector, A., Gangemi, A., Galeazzi, E., Glowinski, A.J., Rossi-Mori, A.: The GALEN CORE model schemata for anatomy: towards a re-usable application-independent model of medical concepts. In: Barahona, P., Veloso, M., Bryant, J. (eds.) Proceedings of the 12th International Congress of the European Federation for Medical Informatics (MIE’94), pp. 229–233 (1994)Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Rector, A., Iannone, L.: Lexically suggest, logically define: quality assurance of the use of qualifiers and expected results of post-coordination in SNOMED CT. J. Biomed. Inform. 45, 199–209 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Rector, A.L., Bechhofer, S., Goble, C.A., Horrocks, I., Nowlan, W.A., Solomon, W.D.: The grail concept modelling language for medical terminology. Artif. Intell. Med. 9(2), 139–171 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Rogers, J.E.: Quality assurance of medical ontologies. Methods Inf. Med. 45(3), 267–274 (2006)Google Scholar
  88. 88.
    Rudolph, S., Krötzsch, M., Hitzler, P.: Cheap Boolean role constructors for description logics. In: Hölldobler, S., Lutz, C., Wansing, H. (eds.) Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Logics in Artificial Intelligence (JELIA’08), vol. 5293, pp. 362–374. LNAI, Springer (2008)Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Schlicht, A., Stuckenschmidt, H.: Peer-to-peer reasoning for interlinked ontologies. Int. J. Semant. Comput. 4(1), 27–58 (2010)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Schlicht, A., Stuckenschmidt, H.: MapResolve. In: Rudolph, S., Gutierrez, C. (eds.) Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Web Reasoning and Rule Systems (RR’11), vol. 6902, pp. 294–299. LNCS, Springer (2011)Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Schlobach, S., Huang, Z., Cornet, R., van Harmelen, F.: Debugging incoherent terminologies. J. Autom. Reason. 39(3), 317–349 (2007)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Schulz, S., Cornet, R., Spackman, K.A.: Consolidating SNOMED CT’s ontological commitment. Appl. Ontol. 6(1), 1–11 (2011)Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Seitz, C., Schönfelder, R.: Rule-based OWL reasoning for specific embedded devices. In: Aroyo, L., Welty, C., Alani, H., Taylor, J., Bernstein, A., Kagal, L., Noy, N., Blomqvist, E. (eds.) Proceedings of the 10th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC’11), vol. 7032, pp. 237–252. LNCS, Springer (2011)Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Sertkaya, B.: In the search of improvements to the \(\mathcal {EL}^+\) classification algorithm. In: Rosati, R., Rudolph, S., Zakharyaschev, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the 24th International Workshop on Description Logics (DL’11), vol. 745, pp. 389–399. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CEUR-WS.org (2011)Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Simančík, F., Kazakov, Y., Horrocks, I.: Consequence-based reasoning beyond Horn ontologies. In: Walsh, T. (ed.) Proceedings of the 22nd International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI’11), pp. 1093–1098. AAAI Press/IJCAI (2011)Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Sirin, E., Parsia, B., Grau, B.C., Kalyanpur, A., Katz, Y.: Pellet: a practical OWL-DL reasoner. J. Web Semant. 5(2), 51–53 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Smith, B., Ashburner, M., Rosse, C., Bard, J., Bug, W., Ceusters, W., Goldberg, L.J., Eilbeck, K., Ireland, A., Mungall, C.J., Consortium, T.O., Leontis, N., Rocca-Serra, P., Ruttenberg, A., Sansone, S.A., Scheuermann, R.H., Shah, N., Whetzeland, P.L., Lewis, S.: The OBO Foundry: coordinated evolution of ontologies to support biomedical data integration. Nat. Biotechnol. 25, 1251–1255 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Soma, R., Prasanna, V.K.: Parallel inferencing for OWL knowledge bases. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Parallel Processing (ICPP’08), pp. 75–82. IEEE Computer Society (2008)Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Suntisrivaraporn, B.: Polynomial-time reasoning support for design and maintenance of large-scale biomedical ontologies. Ph.D. thesis. Technische Universität Dresden, Germany (2009)Google Scholar
  100. 100.
    Tai, W., Keeney, J., O’Sullivan, D.: COROR: a composable rule-entailment OWL reasoner for resource-constrained devices. In: Bassiliades, N., Governatori, G., Paschke, A. (eds.) Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Rule-Based Reasoning, Programming, and Applications (RuleML Europe’11), vol. 6826, pp. 212–226. LNCS, Springer (2011)Google Scholar
  101. 101.
    The Gene Ontology Consortium: Gene ontology annotations and resources. Nucleic Acids Res (2012)Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Thomas, E., Pan, J.Z., Ren, Y.: TrOWL: Tractable OWL 2 reasoning infrastructure. In: Aroyo, L., Antoniou, G., Hyvönen, E., ten Teije, A., Stuckenschmidt, H., Cabral, L., Tudorache, T. (eds.) Proceedings of the 7th Extended Semantic Web Conference (ESWC’10), vol. 6089, pp. 431–435. LNCS, Springer (2010)Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Tsarkov, D., Horrocks, I.: FaCT++ description logic reasoner: system description. In: Furbach, U., Shankar, N. (eds.) Proceedings of the 3rd International Joint Conference on Automated Reasoning (IJCAR’06), vol. 4130, pp. 292–297. LNCS, Springer (2006)Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    Tsarkov, D., Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.F.: Optimizing terminological reasoning for expressive description logics. J. Autom. Reason. 39(3), 277–316 (2007)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Tsarkov, D., Palmisano, I.: Chainsaw: a metareasoner for large ontologies. In: Horrocks, I., Yatskevich, M., Jimenez-Ruiz, E. (eds.) Proceedings of the OWL Reasoner Evaluation Workshop 2012 (ORE’12), vol. 858. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CEUR-WS.org (2012)Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    Urbani, J., Kotoulas, S., Maassen, J., van Harmelen, F., Bal, H.: WebPIE: a Web-scale parallel inference engine using MapReduce. J. Web Semant., 59–75 (2012)Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    Urbani, J., Kotoulas, S., Oren, E., van Harmelen, F.: Scalable distributed reasoning using MapReduce. In: Bernstein, A., Karger, D.R., Heath, T., Feigenbaum, L., Maynard, D., Motta, E., Thirunarayan, K. (eds.) Proceedings of the 8th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC’09), vol. 5823, pp. 634–649. LNCS, Springer (2009)Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    Weaver, J., Hendler, J.A.: Parallel materialization of the finite RDFS closure for hundreds of millions of triples. In: Bernstein, A., Karger, D.R., Heath, T., Feigenbaum, L., Maynard, D., Motta, E., Thirunarayan, K. (eds.) Proceedings of the 8th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC’09), vol. 5823, pp. 682–697. LNCS, Springer (2009)Google Scholar
  109. 109.
    Wos, L., Overbeek, R., Lusk, E., Boyle, J.: Automated reasoning: introduction and applications, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill Inc., New York (1992)MATHGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Wu, K., Haarslev, V.: A parallel reasoner for the description logic \(\mathcal {ALC}\). In: Kazakov, Y., Lembo, D., Wolter, F. (eds.) Proceedings of the 25th International Workshop on Description Logics (DL’12), vol. 846, pp. 378–388. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CEUR-WS.org (2012)Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    Xiang, Z., Mungall, C., Ruttenberg, A., He, Y.: Ontobee: a linked data server and browser for ontology terms. In: International Conference on Biomedical Ontologies (ICBO), pp. 279–281 (2011)Google Scholar
  112. 112.
    Xiao, G., Heymans, S., Eiter, T.: DReW: a reasoner for Datalog-rewritable description logics and dl-programs. In: Eiter, T., Ghali, A.E., Fernández, S., Heymans, S., Krennwallner, T., Lévy, F. (eds.) Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Business models, Business Rules and Ontologies (BuRO’10), pp. 1–14. ONTORULE Project (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yevgeny Kazakov
    • 1
  • Markus Krötzsch
    • 2
  • František Simančík
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of Artificial IntelligenceUniversity of UlmUlmGermany
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations