Combining Safe Rules and Ontologies by Interfacing of Reasoners

  • Uwe Aßmann
  • Jakob Henriksson
  • Jan Małuszyński
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4187)


The paper presents a framework for hybrid combination of rule languages with constraint languages including but not restricted to Description-Logic-based ontology languages. It shows how reasoning in a combined language can be done by interfacing reasoners of the component languages. A prototype system based on the presented principle integrates Datalog with OWL by interfacing XSB Prolog [2] with a DIG-compliant [1] DL reasoner (e.g. Racer[17] ).


Description Logic External Theory Conjunctive Query Ground Atom Rule Reasoner 
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.
    DIG Interface, WWW Page (March 14, available at (2006),
  2. 2.
    XSB (March 14, 2006), available at:
  3. 3.
    Antoniou, G.: Nonmonotonic rule systems using ontologies. In: Proc. Intl. Workshop on Rule Markup Languages for Business Rules on the Semantic Web (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Apt, K., Bol, R.: Logic programming and negation: A survey. J. of Logic Programming 19/20, 9–71 (1994)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baader, F., Bürckert, H.-J., Hollunder, B., Nutt, W., Siekmann, J.H.: Concept logics. Technical Report RR-90-10 (1990)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Baader, F., Calvanese, D., McGuiness, D., et al. (eds.): The Description Logic Handbook. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)MATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Berners-Lee, T.: Semantic web tower. WWW Page (2001), available at:
  8. 8.
    Bry, F., Schaffert, S.: The XML query language Xcerpt: Design principles, examples, and semantics. In: Chaudhri, A.B., Jeckle, M., Rahm, E., Unland, R. (eds.) NODe-WS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2593, pp. 295–310. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lembo, D., Lenzerini, M., Rosati, R., Vetere, G.: DL-lite: Practical Reasoning for Rich DLs. In: Proceedings of the 2004 Description Logic Workshop (DL 2004). CEUR Electronic Workshop Proceedings (2004),
  10. 10.
    Donini, F., Lenzerini, M., Nardi, D., Schaerf, A.: AL-Log: Integrating datalog and description logics. Intelligent Information Systems 10(3), 227–252 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Eiter, T., Lukasiewicz, T., Schindlauer, R., Tompits, H.: Combining answer set programming with description logics for the semantic web. In: Proc. of the International Conference of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 2004) (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Frisch, A., Cohn, A.: Thoughts and afterthoughts on the 1988 workshop on principles of hybrid reasoning. AI Mag. 11(5), 77–83 (1991)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: The stable model semantics for logic programming. In: Kowalski, R.A., Bowen, K. (eds.) Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Logic Programming, pp. 1070–1080. MIT Press, Cambridge (1988)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Grosof, B., Horrocks, I., Volz, R., Decker, S.: Description logic programs: Combining logic programs with description logic. In: Proceedings of 12th International Conference on the World Wide Web (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Governatori, G.: Defeasible Description Logics. In: RuleML, pp. 98–112 (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Haarslev, V.: The New Racer Query Language - nRQL. PDF document. available at:
  17. 17.
    Haarslev, V., Möller, R.: Description of the RACER system and its applications. In: DL2001 Workshop on Description Logics, Stanford, CA (2001)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.F.: A proposal for an OWL rules language. In: Proc. of the Thirteenth International World Wide Web Conference (WWW 2004), pp. 723–731. ACM Press, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Horrocks, I., Tessaris, S.: A conjunctive query language for description logic aboxes. In: Proceedings of the Seventeenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Twelfth Conference on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence, pp. 399–404. AAAI Press / The MIT Press (2000)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jaffar, J., Maher, M.J.: Constraint Logic Programming: A Survey. Journal of Logic Programming 19/20, 503–581 (1994)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wang, K., Billington, D., Blee, J., Antoniou, G.: Combining Description Logic and Defeasible Logic for the Semantic Web. In: RuleML, pp. 170–181 (2004)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wang, K., Antoniou, G., Topor, R.W., Sattar, A.: Merging and Aligning Ontologies in dl-Programs. In: RuleML, pp. 160–171 (2005)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Levy, A., Rousset, M.: CARIN: A representation language combining horn rules and description logics. Artificial Intelligence 104(1-2), 165–209 (1998)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Motik, B., Sattler, U., Studer, R.: Query Answering for OWL-DL with Rules. J. of Web Semantics 3, 41–60 (2005)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rosati, R.: Semantic and computational advantages of the safe integration of ontologies and rules. In: Fages, F., Soliman, S. (eds.) PPSWR 2005. LNCS, vol. 3703, pp. 50–64. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Staab, S. (ed.): Where are the rules. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 76–83 (September/October 2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Uwe Aßmann
    • 1
  • Jakob Henriksson
    • 1
  • Jan Małuszyński
    • 2
  1. 1.Fakultät InformatikTechnical University of DresdenDresdenGermany
  2. 2.Department of Computer and Information ScienceLinköping UniversityLinköpingSweden

Personalised recommendations