Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Well-Founded Semantics for Description Logic Programs in the Semantic Web

  • Conference paper
Rules and Rule Markup Languages for the Semantic Web (RuleML 2004)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 3323))

Abstract

In previous work, towards the integration of rules and ontologies in the Semantic Web, we have proposed a combination of logic programming under the answer set semantics with the description logics \({\cal SHIF}({\mathbf{D}})\) and \({\cal SHOIN}({\mathbf{D}})\), which underly the Web ontology languages OWL Lite and OWL DL, respectively. More precisely, we have introduced description logic programs (or dl-programs), which consist of a description logic knowledge base L and a finite set of description logic rules P, and we have defined their answer set semantics. In this paper, we continue this line of research. Here, as a central contribution, we present the well-founded semantics for dl-programs, and we analyze its semantic properties. In particular, we show that it generalizes the well-founded semantics for ordinary normal programs. Furthermore, we show that in the general case, the well-founded semantics of dl-programs is a partial model that approximates the answer set semantics, whereas in the positive and the stratified case, it is a total model that coincides with the answer set semantics. Finally, we also provide complexity results for dl-programs under the well-founded semantics.

This work was partially supported by the Austrian Science Fund under grants Z29-N04 and P17212-N04, by the European Commission through the IST REWERSE Network of Excellence and the Marie Curie Individual Fellowship HPMF-CT-2001-001286 (disclaimer: The authors are solely responsible for information communicated and the European Commission is not responsible for any views or results expressed), and by the German Research Foundation through a Heisenberg Fellowship. We thank Ulrike Sattler for providing valuable information on complexity-related issues about OWL-DL related description logics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alsaç, G., Baral, C.: Reasoning in description logics using declarative logic programming. Tech. report, Computer Science and Engineering Dept., Arizona State University (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Antoniou, G.: Nonmonotonic rule systems on top of ontology layers. In: Horrocks, I., Hendler, J. (eds.) ISWC 2002. LNCS, vol. 2342, pp. 394–398. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Antoniou, G., Wagner, G.: Rules and defeasible reasoning on the Semantic Web. In: Schröder, M., Wagner, G. (eds.) RuleML 2003. LNCS, vol. 2876, pp. 111–120. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Baader, F., Hollunder, B.: Embedding defaults into terminological representation systems. J. Automated Reasoning 14, 149–180 (1995)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Baral, C., Subrahmanian, V.S.: Dualities between alternative semantics for logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning. J. Automated Reasoning 10(3), 399–420 (1993)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Berners-Lee, T.: Weaving the Web. Harper, San Francisco (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, J., Lassila, O.: The Semantic Web. Scientific American 284(5), 34–43 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Boley, H., Tabet, S., Wagner, G.: Design rationale for RuleML: A markup language for Semantic Web rules. In: Proc. SWWS 2001, pp. 381–401 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Brewka, G.: On the relationship between defeasible logic and well-founded semantics. In: Eiter, T., Faber, W., Truszczyński, M. (eds.) LPNMR 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2173, pp. 121–132. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Damásio, C.V.: The W4 Project (2002), http://centria.di.fct.unl.pt/~cd/projectos/w4/index.htm

  11. Dantsin, E., Eiter, T., Gottlob, G., Voronkov, A.: Complexity and expressive power of logic programming. ACM Computing Surveys 33(3), 374–425 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Donini, F.M., Lenzerini, M., Nardi, D., Schaerf, A.: \({\mathcal AL}\)-log: Integrating datalog and description logics. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems (JIIS) 10(3), 227–252 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Eiter, T., Lukasiewicz, T., Schindlauer, R., Tompits, H.: Combining answer set programming with description logics for the Semantic Web. In: Proc. KR 2004, pp. 141–151 (2004); Preliminary Report RR-1843-03-13, Institut für Informationssysteme, TU Wien (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Fensel, D., Wahlster, W., Lieberman, H., Hendler, J. (eds.): Spinning the Semantic Web: Bringing the World Wide Web to Its Full Potential. MIT Press, Cambridge (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Gelfond, M., Lifschitz, V.: Classical negation in logic programs and deductive databases. New Generation Computing 17, 365–387 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Grosof, B.N.: Courteous logic programs: Prioritized conflict handling for rules. IBM Research Report RC 20836, IBM Research Division, T.J. Watson Research (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Grosof, B.N., Horrocks, I., Volz, R., Decker, S.: Description logic programs: Combining logic programs with description logics. In: Proc. WWW 2003, pp. 48–57 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Haarslev, V., Möller, 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)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.F.: Reducing OWL entailment to description logic satisfiability. In: Fensel, D., Sycara, K., Mylopoulos, J. (eds.) ISWC 2003. LNCS, vol. 2870, pp. 17–29. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.F.: A proposal for an OWL Rules Language. In: Proc. WWW 2004, pp. 723–731 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.F., van Harmelen, F.: From \({\mathcal SHIQ}\) and RDF to OWL: The making of a web ontology language. Journal of Web Semantics 1(1), 7–26 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Horrocks, I., Sattler, U., Tobies, S.: Practical reasoning for expressive description logics. In: Ganzinger, H., McAllester, D., Voronkov, A. (eds.) LPAR 1999. LNCS, vol. 1705, pp. 161–180. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. Hufstadt, U., Motik, B., Sattler, U.: Reasoning for description logics around \({\mathcal SHIQ}\) in a resolution framework. Technical Report 3-8-04/04, FZI Karlsruhe (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Levy, A.Y., Rousset, M.-C.: Combining Horn rules and description logics in CARIN. Artif. Intell. 104(1-2), 165–209 (1998)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  25. Maher, M.J., Governatori, G.: A semantic decomposition of defeasible logics. In: Proc. AAAI/IAAI 1999, pp. 299–305 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  26. May, W., Ludäscher, B., Lausen, G.: Well-founded semantics for deductive object-oriented database languages. In: Bry, F., Ramakrishnan, R., Ramamohanarao, K. (eds.) DOOD 1997. LNCS, vol. 1341, pp. 320–336. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  27. Niemelä, I., Simons, P., Syrjänen, T.: Smodels: A system for answer set programming. In: Proc. NMR 2000 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Rao, P., Sagonas, K., Swift, T., Warren, D.S., Freire, J.: XSB: A system for efficiently computing WFS. In: Fuhrbach, U., Dix, J., Nerode, A. (eds.) LPNMR 1997. LNCS, vol. 1265, pp. 430–440. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Rosati, R.: Towards expressive KR systems integrating datalog and description logics: Preliminary report. In: Proc. DL 1999, pp. 160–164 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Swift, T.: Deduction in ontologies via ASP. In: Lifschitz, V., Niemelä, I. (eds.) LPNMR 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2923, pp. 275–288. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  31. Tobies, S.: Complexity Results and Practical Algorithms for Logics in Knowledge Representation. PhD thesis, RWTH Aachen, Germany (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Van Belleghem, K., Denecker, M., De Schreye, D.: A strong correspondence between description logics and open logic programming. In: Proc. ICLP 1997, pp. 346–360 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Van Gelder, A.: The alternating fixpoint of logic programs with negation. In: Proc. PODS 1989, pp. 1–10 (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Van Gelder, A., Ross, K.A., Schlipf, J.S.: The well-founded semantics for general logic programs. Journal of the ACM 38(3), 620–650 (1991)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  35. W3C. OWL web ontology language overview, W3C Recommendation (February 10, 2004), Available at http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-features-20040210/

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für Informationssysteme, Technische Universität Wien, Favoritenstraße 9-11, A-1040, Vienna, Austria

    Thomas Eiter, Thomas Lukasiewicz, Roman Schindlauer & Hans Tompits

  2. Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica, Università di Roma “La Sapienza”, Via Salaria 113, I-00198, Rome, Italy

    Thomas Lukasiewicz

Authors
  1. Thomas Eiter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thomas Lukasiewicz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Roman Schindlauer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hans Tompits
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Computer Science Department of University of Crete, Greece

    Grigoris Antoniou

  2. Institute for Information Technology – e-Business, National Research Council of Canada, E3B 9W4, Fredericton, NB, Canada

    Harold Boley

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2004 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Eiter, T., Lukasiewicz, T., Schindlauer, R., Tompits, H. (2004). Well-Founded Semantics for Description Logic Programs in the Semantic Web. In: Antoniou, G., Boley, H. (eds) Rules and Rule Markup Languages for the Semantic Web. RuleML 2004. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3323. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30504-0_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30504-0_7

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-23842-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-30504-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation