The Cognitive Complexity of OWL Justifications

  • Matthew Horridge
  • Samantha Bail
  • Bijan Parsia
  • Ulrike Sattler
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7031)

Abstract

In this paper, we present an approach to determining the cognitive complexity of justifications for entailments of OWL ontologies. We introduce a simple cognitive complexity model and present the results of validating that model via experiments involving OWL users. The validation is based on test data derived from a large and diverse corpus of naturally occurring justifications. Our contributions include validation for the cognitive complexity model, new insights into justification complexity, a significant corpus with novel analyses of justifications suitable for experimentation, and an experimental protocol suitable for model validation and refinement.

References

  1. 1.
    Borgida, A., Calvanese, D., Rodriguez-Muro, M.: Explanation in the DL-lite family of description logics. In: Chung, S. (ed.) OTM 2008, Part II. LNCS, vol. 5332, pp. 1440–1457. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Davis, M.: Obvious logical inferences. In: IJCAI-1981 (1981)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Horridge, M., Parsia, B.: From justifications towards proofs for ontology engineering. In: KR-2010 (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Horridge, M., Parsia, B., Sattler, U.: Laconic and Precise Justifications in OWL. In: Sheth, A.P., Staab, S., Dean, M., Paolucci, M., Maynard, D., Finin, T., Thirunarayan, K. (eds.) ISWC 2008. LNCS, vol. 5318, pp. 323–338. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Horridge, M., Parsia, B., Sattler, U.: Lemmas for justifications in OWL. In: DL 2009 (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Horridge, M., Parsia, B., Sattler, U.: Justification Oriented Proofs in OWL. In: Patel-Schneider, P.F., Pan, Y., Hitzler, P., Mika, P., Zhang, L., Pan, J.Z., Horrocks, I., Glimm, B. (eds.) ISWC 2010, Part I. LNCS, vol. 6496, pp. 354–369. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Johnson-Laird, P.N., Byrne, R.M.J.: Deduction. Psychology Press (1991)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kalyanpur, A., Parsia, B., Sirin, E., Cuenca-Grau, B.: Repairing Unsatisfiable Concepts in OWL Ontologies. In: Sure, Y., Domingue, J. (eds.) ESWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4011, pp. 170–184. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kalyanpur, A., Parsia, B., Sirin, E., Hendler, J.: Debugging unsatisfiable classes in OWL ontologies. Journal of Web Semantics 3(4) (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kazakov, Y.: \(\mathcal{RIQ}\) and \(\mathcal{SROIQ}\) are harder than \(\mathcal{SHOIQ}\). In: KR 2008. AAAI Press (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lam, S.C.J.: Methods for Resolving Inconsistencie In Ontologies. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, Aberdeen (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lewis, C.H.: Using the thinking-aloud method in cognitive interface design. Research report RC-9265, IBM (1982)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Newstead, S., Brandon, P., Handley, S., Dennis, I., Evans, J.S.B.: Predicting the difficulty of complex logical reasoning problems, vol. 12. Psychology Press (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Parsons, L.M., Osherson, D.: New evidence for distinct right and left brain systems for deductive versus probabilistic reasoning. Cerebral Cortex 11(10), 954–965 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rips, L.J.: The Psychology of Proof. MIT Press, Cambridge (1994)MATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Roussey, C., Corcho, O., Vilches-Blázquez, L.: A catalogue of OWL ontology antipatterns. In: Proc. of K-CAP-2009, pp. 205–206 (2009)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Strube, G.: The role of cognitive science in knowledge engineering. In: Contemporary Knowledge Engineering and Cognition (1992)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthew Horridge
    • 1
  • Samantha Bail
    • 1
  • Bijan Parsia
    • 1
  • Ulrike Sattler
    • 1
  1. 1.The University of ManchesterManchesterUK

Personalised recommendations