Advertisement

Querying OWL 2 QL and Non-monotonic Rules

  • Matthias Knorr
  • José Júlio Alferes
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7031)

Abstract

Answering (conjunctive) queries is an important reasoning task in Description Logics (DL), hence also in highly expressive ontology languages, such as OWL. Extending such ontology languages with rules, such as those expressible in RIF-Core, and further with non-monotonic rules, integrating default negation as described in the RIF-FLD, yields an even more expressive language that allows for modeling defaults, exceptions, and integrity constraints.

Here, we present a top-down procedure for querying knowledge bases (KB) that combine non-monotonic rules with an ontology in DL-\(Lite_\mathcal{R}\) – the DL underlying the OWL 2 profile OWL 2 QL. This profile aims particularly at answering queries in an efficient way for KB with large ABoxes. Our procedure extends the query-answering facility to KB that also include non-monotonic rules, while maintaining tractability of reasoning (w.r.t. data complexity). We show that the answers are sound and complete w.r.t. the well-founded MKNF model for hybrid MKNF KB \(\mathcal{K}\).

Keywords

Description Logic Reasoning Task Conjunctive Query Minimal Answer Combine Complexity 
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.

References

  1. 1.
    Alferes, J.J., Knorr, M., Swift, T.: Queries to Hybrid MKNF Knowledge Bases Through Oracular Tabling. In: Bernstein, A., Karger, D.R., Heath, T., Feigenbaum, L., Maynard, D., Motta, E., Thirunarayan, K. (eds.) ISWC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5823, pp. 1–16. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Artale, A., Calvanese, D., Kontchakov, R., Zakharyaschev, M.: The DL-Lite family and relations. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 36, 1–69 (2009)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boley, H., Hallmark, G., Kifer, M., Paschke, A., Polleres, A., Reynolds, D. (eds.): RIF Core Dialect. W3C Candidate Recommendation (June 22, 2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boley, H., Kifer, M. (eds.): RIF Framework for Logic Dialects. W3C Candidate Recommendation (June 22, 2010), http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-fld/
  5. 5.
    Calvanese, D., de Giacomo, G., Lembo, D., Lenzerini, M., Rosati, R.: Tractable reasoning and efficient query answering in description logics: The DL-Lite family. Journal of Automated Reasoning 39(3), 385–429 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen, W., Warren, D.S.: Tabled Evaluation with Delaying for General Logic Programs. J. ACM 43(1), 20–74 (1996)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Glimm, B., Lutz, C., Horrocks, I., Sattler, U.: Answering conjunctive queries in the \(\mathcal{SHIQ}\) description logic. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 31, 150–197 (2008)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Grosof, B.N., Horrocks, I., Volz, R., Decker, S.: Description logic programs: Combining logic programs with description logics. In: Proc. of the World Wide Web Conference (WWW 2003), pp. 48–57. ACM (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hitzler, P., Krötzsch, M., Parsia, B., Patel-Schneider, P.F., Rudolph, S. (eds.): OWL 2 Web Ontology Language: Primer. W3C Recommendation (October 2009)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Knorr, M., Alferes, J.J.: Querying in \(\mathcal{EL}^{+}\) with nonmonotonic rules. In: Coelho, H., Studer, R., Wooldridge, M. (eds.) 19th European Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, ECAI 2010, pp. 1079–1080. IOS Press (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Knorr, M., Alferes, J.J., Hitzler, P.: Local closed world reasoning with description logics under the well-founded semantics. Artificial Intelligence 175(9-10), 1528–1554 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lifschitz, V.: Nonmonotonic databases and epistemic queries. In: Mylopoulos, J., Reiter, R. (eds.) 12th Int. Joint Conf. on AI, IJCAI 1991, pp. 381–386 (1991)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Motik, B., Rosati, R.: Reconciling Description Logics and Rules. Journal of the ACM 57(5), 93–154 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Patel, C., Cimino, J., Dolby, J., Fokoue, A., Kalyanpur, A., Kershenbaum, A., Ma, L., Schonberg, E., Srinivas, K.: Matching Patient Records to Clinical Trials Using Ontologies. In: Aberer, K., Choi, K.-S., Noy, N., Allemang, D., Lee, K.-I., Nixon, L.J.B., Golbeck, J., Mika, P., Maynard, D., Mizoguchi, R., Schreiber, G., Cudré-Mauroux, P. (eds.) ASWC 2007 and ISWC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4825, pp. 816–829. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Prud’hommeaux, E., Seaborne, A. (eds.): SPARQL Query Language for RDF. W3C Candidate Recommendation (January 2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthias Knorr
    • 1
  • José Júlio Alferes
    • 1
  1. 1.CENTRIA, FCTUniversidade Nova de LisboaPortugal

Personalised recommendations