Advertisement

System Description: DLP

  • Peter Patel-Schneider
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1831)

Abstract

DLP (Description Logic Prover) is an experimental description logic knowledge representation system. DLP implements an expressive description logic that includes propositional dynamic logic as a subset. DLP provides a simple interface allowing users to build knowledge bases of descriptions in this description logic, but, as an experimental system, DLP does not have a full user interface.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Baader, F., Franconi, E., Hollunder, B., Nebel, B., Profitlich, H.-J.: An empirical analysis of optimization techniques for terminological representation systems or: Making KRIS get a move on. In: Nebel, B., Rich, C., Swartout, W. (eds.) Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Third International Conference (KR 1992), October 1992, pp. 270–281. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco (1992); Also available as DFKI RR-93-03Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baker, A.B.: Intelligent Backtracking on Constraint Satisfaction Problems: Experimental and Theoretical Results. PhD thesis, University of Oregon (1995)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bresciani, P., Franconi, E., Tessaris, S.: Implementing and testing expressive description logics: a preliminary report. In: Ellis, G., Levinson, R.A., Fall, A., Dahl, V. (eds.) Knowledge Retrieval, Use and Storage for Efficiency: Proceedings of the First International KRUSE Symposium, pp. 28–39 (1995)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ginsberg, M.L.: Dynamic backtracking. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 1, 25–46 (1993)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Giunchiglia, E., Giunchiglia, F., Sebastiani, R., Tacchella, A.: More evaluation of decision procedures for modal logics. In: Cohn, A.G., Schubert, L., Shapiro, S.C. (eds.) Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference (KR 1998), June 1998, pp. 626–635. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco (1998)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Heuerding, A., Schwendimann, S.: A benchmark method for the propositional modal logics K, KT, and S4. Technical report IAM-96-015, University of Bern, Switzerland (October 1996)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Horrocks, I.: Optimising Tableaux Decision Procedures for Description Logics. PhD thesis, University of Manchester (1997)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P., Sebastiani, R.: An Analysis of Empirical Testing for Modal Decision Procedures. Logic Journal of the IGPL (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.: FaCT and DLP. In: de Swart, H. (ed.) TABLEAUX 1998. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1397, pp. 27–30. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.: Performance of DLP on random modal formulae. In: Proceedings of the 1999 Description Logic Workshop, July 1999, pp. 120–124 (1999)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Patel-Schneider, P., Horrocks, I.: DLP and FaCT. In: Murray, N.V. (ed.) TABLEAUX 1999. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1617, pp. 19–23. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rector, A., Bechhofer, S., Goble, C.A., Horrocks, I., Nowlan, W.A., Solomon, W.D.: The Grail concept modelling language for medical terminology. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine 9, 139–171 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter Patel-Schneider
    • 1
  1. 1.Bell Labs ResearchMurray HillU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations