A Reasoning Algorithm for pD*

  • Huiying Li
  • Yanbing Wang
  • Yuzhong Qu
  • Jeff Z. Pan
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4185)


pD* semantics extends the ‘if-semantics’ of RDFS to a subset of the OWL vocabulary. It leads to simple entailment rules and relatively low computational complexity for reasoning. In this paper, we propose a forward-chaining reasoning algorithm to support RDFS entailments under the pD* semantics. This algorithm extends the Sesame algorithm to cope with the pD* entailments. In particular, an optimization to the dependent table between entailment rules is presented to eliminate much redundant inferring steps. Finally, some test results are given to illustrate the correctness and performance of this algorithm.


Description Logic Reasoning Algorithm Dependent Table Entailment Rule Pass Test Case 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Broekstra, J., Kampman, A., Harmelen, F.: Sesame: A Generic Architecture for Storing and Querying RDF and RDF Schema. In: Horrocks, I., Hendler, J. (eds.) ISWC 2002. LNCS, vol. 2342, pp. 54–68. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Carroll, J.J., Roo, J.D. (eds.): OWL Web Ontology Language Test Cases. W3C Recommendation (February 10, 2004), http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-test-20040210/
  3. 3.
    Guo, Y., Pan, Z.h., Heflin, J.: An Evaluation of Knowledge Base Systems for Large OWL Datasets. In: McIlraith, S.A., Plexousakis, D., van Harmelen, F. (eds.) ISWC 2004. LNCS, vol. 3298, pp. 274–288. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Haarslev, V., Moller, R.: RACER system description. In: Goré, R.P., Leitsch, A., Nipkow, T. (eds.) IJCAR 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2083, pp. 701–705. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hayes, P. (ed.): RDF Semantics. W3C Recommendation (February 10, 2004), Latest version is available at, http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/
  6. 6.
    Horst, H.J.: Completeness, decidability and complexity of entailment for RDF Schema and a semantic extension involving the OWL vocabulary. Journal of Web Semantics 3, 79–115 (2005)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pan, J.Z., Horrocks, I.: RDFS(FA) and RDF MT: Two Semantics for RDFS. In: Fensel, D., Sycara, K., Mylopoulos, J. (eds.) ISWC 2003. LNCS, vol. 2870, pp. 30–46. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Patel-Schneider, P.F.: Building the SemanticWeb Tower from RDF Straw. In: Proc. of the 19th Int. Joint Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2005 (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sirin, E., Parsia, B., Grau, B.C., Kalyanpur, A., Katz, Y.: Pellet: A Practical OWLDL Reasoner. Submitted for publication to Journal of Web SemanticsGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tsarkov, D., Horrocks, I.: Efficient reasoning with range and domain constraints. In: Proc. of the Description Logic Workshop, pp. 41–50 (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Huiying Li
    • 1
  • Yanbing Wang
    • 1
  • Yuzhong Qu
    • 1
  • Jeff Z. Pan
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringSoutheast UniversityNanjingP.R. China
  2. 2.Department of Computing ScienceThe University of AberdeenUK

Personalised recommendations