Abstract
A challenge in ontology engineering is the mismatch in expertise between the ontology engineer and domain expert, which often leads to important constraints not being specified. Domain experts often only focus on specifying constraints that should hold and not on specifying constraints that could possibly be violated. In an attempt to bridge this gap we propose the use of “perfect test data”. The generated test data is perfect in that it satisfies all the constraints of an application domain that are required, including ensuring that the test data violates constraints that can be violated. In the context of Description Logic ontologies we call this test data an “Armstrong ABox”, a notion derived from Armstrong relations in relational database theory. In this paper we detail the theoretical development of Armstrong ABoxes for \(\mathcal {ALC}\) TBoxes as well as an algorithm for generating such Armstrong ABoxes. The proposed algorithm is based, via the ontology completion algorithm of Baader et al. on attribute exploration in formal concept analysis.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Baader, F., Calvanese, D., McGuinness, D.L., Nardi, D., Patel-Schneider, P.F.: The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation and Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2007). https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511711787
Baader, F., Ganter, B., Sertkaya, B., Sattler, U.: Completing description logic knowledge bases using formal concept analysis. In: Veloso, M.M. (ed.) Proceedings of 20th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. IJCAI 2007, January 2007, Hyderabad, pp. 230–235. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers (2007). http://ijcai.org/Proceedings/07/Papers/035.pdf
Baader, F., Horrocks, I., Sattler, U.: Description logics. In: van Harmelen, F., Lifschitz, V., Porter, B. (eds.) Handbook of Knowledge Representation. Foundations of Articial Intelligence, vol. 3, pp. 135–179. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/s1574-6526(07)03003-9
Baader, F., Sertkaya, B.: Usability issues in description logic knowledge base completion. In: Ferré, S., Rudolph, S. (eds.) ICFCA 2009. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5548, pp. 1–21. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-01815-2_1
Boehm, B., Basili, V.R.: Software defect reduction top 10 list. IEEE Comput. 34(1), 135–137 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1109/2.962984
Brooks, F.P.: No silver bullet: essence and accidents of software engineering. IEEE Comput. 20(4), 10–19 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1109/mc.1987.1663532
Davey, B.A., Priestley, H.A.: Introduction to Lattices and Order, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2002). https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511809088
Fagin, R., Vardi, M.Y.: Armstrong databases for functional and inclusion dependencies. Inf. Process Lett. 16(1), 13–19 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-0190(83)90005-4
Ganter, B., Obiedkov, S.: Conceptual Exploration. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-49291-8
Guigues, J.L., Duquenne, V.: Famille minimale d’implications informatives résultant d’un tableau de données binaires. Math. Sci. Hum. 24(95), 5–18 (1986)
Harmse, H., Britz, K., Gerber, A.: Informative Armstrong RDF datasets for \(n\)-ary relations. In: Borgo, S., Hitzler, P. (eds.) Proceedings of 10th International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, pp. 187–199. IOS Press (2018). https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-910-2-187
Harmse, H., Britz, K., Gerber, A.: Armstrong relations for ontology design and evaluation. In: Lenzerini, M., Peñaloza, R. (eds.) Proceedings of 29th International Workshop on Description Logics. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 1577. CEUR-WS.org (2016). http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1577/paper_4.pdf
Konev, B., Ozaki, A., Wolter, F.: A model for learning description logic ontologies based on exact learning. In: Schuurmans, D., Wellman, M.P. (eds.) Proceedings of 13th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, February 2016, Phoenix, AZ, pp. 1008–1015. AAAI Press (2016). https://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/AAAI/AAAI16/paper/view/11948/11696
Langeveldt, W., Link, S.: Empirical evidence for the usefulness of Armstrong relations in the acquisition of meaningful functional dependencies. Inf. Syst. 35(3), 352–374 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.is.2009.11.002
Link, S.: Armstrong databases: validation, communication and consolidation of conceptual models with perfect test data. In: Ghose, A., Ferrarotti, F.A. (eds.) Proceedings of 8th Asia-Pacific Conference on Conceptual Modelling. APCCM 2012, CRPIT, January–February 2012, Melbourne, vol. 130, pp. 3–20. Australian Computer Society (2012). https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2523784
Nebel, B.: Reasoning and Revision in Hybrid Representation Systems. LNCS, vol. 422. Springer, Heidelberg (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/bfb0016445
Rudolph, S.: Relational Exploration: Combining Description Logics and Formal Concept Analysis for Knowledge Specification. Ph.D. thesis, Technische Universität Dresden (2006)
Sertkaya, B.: Formal Concept Analysis Methods for Description Logics. Ph.D. thesis, Technische Universität Dresden (2006)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Harmse, H., Britz, K., Gerber, A. (2018). Generating Armstrong ABoxes for \(\mathcal {ALC}\) TBoxes. In: Fischer, B., Uustalu, T. (eds) Theoretical Aspects of Computing – ICTAC 2018. ICTAC 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11187. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02508-3_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02508-3_12
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-02507-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-02508-3
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)