Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

On the Semantic Relationship between Datalog and Description Logics

  • Conference paper
Web Reasoning and Rule Systems (RR 2010)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 6333))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Translations to (first-order) datalog have been used in a number of inferencing techniques for description logics (DLs), yet the relationship between the semantic expressivities of function-free Horn logic and DL is understood only poorly. Although Description Logic Programs (DLP) have been described as DLs in the “expressive intersection” of DL and datalog, it is unclear what an intersection of two syntactically incomparable logics is, even if both have a first-order logic semantics. In this work, we offer a characterisation for DL fragments that can be expressed, in a concrete sense, in datalog. We then determine the largest such fragment for the DL \(\mathcal{ALC}\), and provide an outlook on the extension of our methods to more expressive DLs.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

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.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Andréka, H., van Benthem, J.F.A.K., Németi, I.: Modal languages and bounded fragments of predicate logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic 27(3), 217–274 (1998)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Baader, F., Calvanese, D., McGuinness, D., Nardi, D., Patel-Schneider, P. (eds.): The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and Applications, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2007)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Baget, J.F., Leclere, M., Mugnier, M.L.: Walking the decidability line for rules with existential variables. In: Lin, F., Sattler, U., Truszczynski, M. (eds.) Proc. 12th Int. Conf. on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR’10), pp. 466–476. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Baral, C., Gelfond, M.: Logic programming and knowledge representation. J. Log. Program. 19(20), 73–148 (1994)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Calì, A., Gottlob, G., Lukasiewicz, T.: Datalog±: a unified approach to ontologies and integrity constraints. In: Fagin, R. (ed.) Proc. 12th Int. Conf. on Database Theory (ICDT’09), pp. 14–30. ACM, New York (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Chang, C., Keisler, H.J.: Model Theory, 3rd edn. Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, vol. 73. North-Holland, Amsterdam (1990)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. 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 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Eiter, T., Ianni, G., Schindlauer, R., Tompits, H.: A uniform integration of higher-order reasoning and external evaluations in answer-set programming. In: Kaelbling, Saffiotti (eds.) [16], pp. 90–96

    Google Scholar 

  10. Eiter, T., Lukasiewicz, T., Schindlauer, R., Tompits, H.: Combining answer set programming with description logics for the Semantic Web. In: Dubois, D., Welty, C.A., Williams, M.A. (eds.) Proc. 9th Int. Conf. on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR’04), pp. 141–151. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gasse, F., Sattler, U., Haarslev, V.: Rewriting rules into \(\mathcal{SROIQ}\) axioms. In: Baader, F., Lutz, C., Motik, B. (eds.) Proc. 21st Int. Workshop on Description Logics (DL’08). CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 353, CEUR-WS.org. (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Grosof, B.N., Horrocks, I., Volz, R., Decker, S.: Description logic programs: combining logic programs with description logic. In: Proc. 12th Int. Conf. on World Wide Web (WWW’03), pp. 48–57. ACM, New York (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.F.: A proposal for an OWL rules language. In: Feldman, S.I., Uretsky, M., Najork, M., Wills, C.E. (eds.) Proc. 13th Int. Conf. on World Wide Web (WWW’04), pp. 723–731. ACM, New York (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.F., Bechhofer, S., Tsarkov, D.: OWL Rules: A proposal and prototype implementation. Journal of Web Semantics 3(1), 23–40 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hustadt, U., Motik, B., Sattler, U.: Data complexity of reasoning in very expressive description logics. In: Kaelbling, Saffiotti (eds.) [16], pp. 466–471

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kaelbling, L., Saffiotti, A. (eds.): Proc. 19th Int. Joint Conf. on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI’05). Professional Book Center (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kazakov, Y.: Saturation-Based Decision Procedures for Extensions of the Guarded Fragment. Ph.D. thesis, Universität des Saarlandes, Saarbrücken, Germany (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Krötzsch, M.: Efficient inferencing for OWL EL. In: Proc. 12th European Conf. on Logics in Artificial Intelligence (JELIA’10). LNCS (LNAI). Springer, Heidelberg (to appear, 2010)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Krötzsch, M., Rudolph, S.: Finding the largest datalog fragment of description logic. Tech. Rep. 3002, Institute AIFB, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (2009), http://www.aifb.kit.edu/web/Techreport3002

  20. Krötzsch, M., Rudolph, S., Hitzler, P.: Complexity boundaries for Horn description logics. In: Proc. 22nd AAAI Conf. on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI’07), pp. 452–457. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Krötzsch, M., Rudolph, S., Hitzler, P.: Description logic rules. In: Ghallab, M., Spyropoulos, C.D., Fakotakis, N., Avouris, N. (eds.) Proc. 18th European Conf. on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI’08), pp. 80–84. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Krötzsch, M., Rudolph, S., Hitzler, P.: ELP: Tractable rules for OWL 2. In: Sheth, A., Staab, S., Dean, M., Paolucci, M., Maynard, D., Finin, T., Thirunarayan, K. (eds.) ISWC 2008. LNCS, vol. 5318, pp. 649–664. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. Levy, A.Y., Rousset, M.C.: Combining Horn rules and description logics in carin. Artificial Intelligence 104(1-2), 165–209 (1998)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. Monk, J.: Mathematical Logic. Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer, Heidelberg (1976)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Motik, B., Horrocks, I., Rosati, R., Sattler, U.: Can OWL and logic programming live together happily ever after? In: Cruz, I.F., Decker, S., Allemang, D., Preist, C., Schwabe, D., Mika, P., Uschold, M., Aroyo, L. (eds.) ISWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4273, pp. 501–514. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  26. Motik, B., Rosati, R.: A faithful integration of description logics with logic programming. In: Veloso, M.M. (ed.) Proc. 20th Int. Joint Conf. on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI’07), pp. 477–482 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Motik, B., Sattler, U., Studer, R.: Query answering for OWL DL with rules. Journal of Web Semantics 3(1), 41–60 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Rosati, R.: \(\mathcal{DL}\)+log: A tight integration of description logics and disjunctive datalog. In: Doherty, P., Mylopoulos, J., Welty, C.A. (eds.) Proc. 10th Int. Conf. on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR’06), pp. 68–78. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Volz, R.: Web Ontology Reasoning with Logic Databases. Ph.D. thesis, Universität Karlsruhe (TH), Germany (2004)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Computing Laboratory, Oxford University, UK

    Markus Krötzsch

  2. Institute AIFB, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, DE

    Sebastian Rudolph

  3. Institute for Theoretical Computer Science, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, DE

    Peter H. Schmitt

Authors
  1. Markus Krötzsch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sebastian Rudolph
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Peter H. Schmitt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. of Computer Science and Engineering, Wright State University, 3640 Colonel Glenn Hwy, 45435, Dayton, OH, USA

    Pascal Hitzler

  2. Computing Laboratory, Oxford University, Wolfson Building, Parks Road, OX1 3QD, Oxford, UK

    Thomas Lukasiewicz

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Krötzsch, M., Rudolph, S., Schmitt, P.H. (2010). On the Semantic Relationship between Datalog and Description Logics. In: Hitzler, P., Lukasiewicz, T. (eds) Web Reasoning and Rule Systems. RR 2010. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6333. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15918-3_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15918-3_8

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-15917-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-15918-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics