Skip to main content

Inconsistency-Tolerant Semantics for 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

We address the problem of dealing with inconsistencies in Description Logic (DL) knowledge bases. Our general goal is both to study DL semantical frameworks which are inconsistency-tolerant, and to devise techniques for answering unions of conjunctive queries posed to DL knowledge bases under such inconsistency-tolerant semantics. Our work is inspired by the approaches to consistent query answering in databases, which are based on the idea of living with inconsistencies in the database, but trying to obtain only consistent information during query answering, by relying on the notion of database repair. We show that, if we use the notion of repair studied in databases, inconsistency-tolerant query answering is intractable, even for the simplest form of queries. Therefore, we study different variants of the repair-based semantics, with the goal of reaching a good compromise between expressive power of the semantics and computational complexity of inconsistency-tolerant query answering.

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

Access this chapter

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. Baader, F., Calvanese, D., McGuinness, D., Nardi, D., Patel-Schneider, P.F. (eds.): The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation and Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Bertossi, L., Hunter, A., Schaub, T. (eds.): Inconsistency Tolerance. LNCS, vol. 3300. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Calì, A., Lembo, D., Rosati, R.: On the decidability and complexity of query answering over inconsistent and incomplete databases. In: Proc. of PODS 2003, pp. 260–271 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lembo, D., Lenzerini, M., Rosati, R.: Tractable reasoning and efficient query answering in description logics: The DL-Lite family. J. of Automated Reasoning 39(3), 385–429 (2007)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Chomicki, J.: Consistent query answering: Five easy pieces. In: Schwentick, T., Suciu, D. (eds.) ICDT 2007. LNCS, vol. 4353, pp. 1–17. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Eiter, T., Gottlob, G.: On the complexity of propositional knowledge base revision, updates and counterfactuals. Artificial Intelligence 57, 227–270 (1992)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Glimm, B., Horrocks, I., Lutz, C., Sattler, U.: Conjunctive query answering for the description logic \(\mathcal{SHIQ}\). In: Proc. of IJCAI 2007, pp. 399–404 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Haasa, P., van Harmelen, F., Huang, Z., Stuckenschmidt, H., Sure, Y.: A framework for handling inconsistency in changing ontologies. In: Gil, Y., Motta, E., Benjamins, V.R., Musen, M.A. (eds.) ISWC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3729, pp. 353–367. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Huang, Z., van Harmelen, F., ten Teije, A.: Reasoning with inconsistent ontologies. In: Proc. of IJCAI 2005, pp. 454–459 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Lembo, D., Ruzzi, M.: Consistent query answering over description logic ontologies. In: Proc. of RR 2007 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ma, Y., Hitzler, P.: Paraconsistent reasoning for owl 2. In: Proc. of RR 2009, pp. 197–211 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Parsia, B., Sirin, E., Kalyanpur, A.: Debugging OWL ontologies. In: Proc. of WWW 2005, pp. 633–640 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Poggi, A., Lembo, D., Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lenzerini, M., Rosati, R.: Linking data to ontologies. J. on Data Semantics X, 133–173 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Qi, G., Du, J.: Model-based revision operators for terminologies in description logics. In: Proc. of IJCAI 2009, pp. 891–897 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Winslett, M.: Updating Logical Databases. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1990)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Lembo, D., Lenzerini, M., Rosati, R., Ruzzi, M., Savo, D.F. (2010). Inconsistency-Tolerant Semantics for 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_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15918-3_9

  • 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