Revisiting the Hardness of Query Answering in Expressive Description Logics

  • Magdalena Ortiz
  • Mantas Šimkus
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8741)


Answering conjunctive queries over Description Logic (DL) knowledge bases is known to be 2ExpTime-hard for the DLs \(\mathcal{ALCI}\), \(\mathcal{SH}\), and their extensions. In this technical note, we revisit these results to identify other equally hard settings. In particular, we show that a simple adaptation of the proof for \(\mathcal{SH}\) proves that query answering is 2ExpTime-hard already for \(\mathcal{ALC}\) if we consider more expressive query languages such as positive existential queries and (restricted classes of) conjunctive regular path queries.


  1. 1.
    Bienvenu, M., Calvanese, D., Ortiz, M., Šimkus, M.: Nested regular path queries in description logics. In: Proc. of KR 2014. AAAI Press (2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bourhis, P., Morak, M., Pieris, A.: The impact of disjunction on query answering under guarded-based existential rules. In: Proc. of IJCAI 2013, pp. 796–802. IJCAI/AAAI (2013)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Calvanese, D., Eiter, T., Ortiz, M.: Regular path queries in expressive description logics with nominals. In: Proc. of IJCAI 2009, pp. 714–720 (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Calvanese, D., Eiter, T., Ortiz, M.: Answering regular path queries in expressive description logics via alternating tree-automata. Information and Computation 237, 12–55 (2014)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Eiter, T., Lutz, C., Ortiz, M., Šimkus, M.: Query answering in description logics with transitive roles. In: Proc. of IJCAI 2009, pp. 759–764 (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Eiter, T., Ortiz, M., Šimkus, M.: Conjunctive query answering in the Description Logic \(\mathcal{SH}\) using knots. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 78(1), 47–85 (2012)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Glimm, B., Kazakov, Y.: Role conjunctions in expressive description logics. In: Cervesato, I., Veith, H., Voronkov, A. (eds.) LPAR 2008. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5330, pp. 391–405. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Glimm, B., Lutz, C., Horrocks, I., Sattler, U.: Conjunctive query answering for the description logic SHIQ. J. Artif. Intell. Res. (JAIR) 31, 157–204 (2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lutz, C.: The complexity of conjunctive query answering in expressive description logics. In: Armando, A., Baumgartner, P., Dowek, G. (eds.) IJCAR 2008. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5195, pp. 179–193. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Motik, B., Sattler, U., Studer, R.: Query answering for OWL-DL with rules. J. Web Sem. 3(1), 41–60 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ortiz, M., Rudolph, S., Šimkus, M.: Query answering in the Horn fragments of the description logics \(\mathcal{SHOIQ}\) and \(\mathcal{SROIQ}\). In: Proc. of IJCAI 2011, pp. 1039–1044 (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ortiz, M., Šimkus, M., Eiter, T.: Worst-case optimal conjunctive query answering for an expressive description logic without inverses. In: Proc. of AAAI 2008, pp. 504–510 (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ortiz, M., Šimkus, M.: Reasoning and query answering in Description Logics. In: Eiter, T., Krennwallner, T. (eds.) Reasoning Web 2012. LNCS, vol. 7487, pp. 1–53. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Magdalena Ortiz
    • 1
  • Mantas Šimkus
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Information SystemsVienna University of TechnologyAustria

Personalised recommendations