Skip to main content

Eliminating Nonmonotonic DL-Atoms in Description Logic Programs

  • Conference paper
Web Reasoning and Rule Systems (RR 2013)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 7994))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 812 Accesses

Abstract

Nonmonotonic description logic programs (dl-programs) are a well-known formalism for combining rules and ontologies, where rules interact with an underlying ontology via dl-atoms that allow queries to the ontology under a possible update of its assertional part. It is known that dl-atoms may be nonmonotonic and dl-programs without nonmonotonic dl-atoms have many desirable properties. In this paper, we show that it is possible to remove nonmonotonic dl-atoms from a dl-program while preserving its strong/weak answer set semantics. Though the translation is faithful, it relies on the knowledge about monotonicity of dl-atoms. We then thoroughly investigate the complexity of deciding whether a dl-atom is monotonic under the description logics DL-Lite\(_{\mathcal R}\), \({\mathcal{EL}}^{++}\), \({\mathcal{SHIF}}\) and \({\mathcal{SHOIN}}\), which is of independent interest for computing strong answer sets. We show that the problem is intractable in general, but tractable for dl-atoms with bounded queries in DL-Lite\(_{\mathcal R}\).

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 49.99
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. Artale, A., Calvanese, D., Kontchakov, R., Zakharyaschev, M.: The DL-Lite family and relations. Journal of Artifical Intelligence Research 36, 1–69 (2009)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Baader, F., Brandt, S., Lutz, C.: Pushing the EL envelope. In: IJCAI 2005, pp. 364–369 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Baader, F., Calvanese, D., McGuinness, D.L., Nardi, D., Patel-Schneider, P.F.: The Description Logic Handbook, 2nd edn. Cambridge Univ. Press (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Brewka, G., Eiter, T., Truszczynski, M.: Answer set programming at a glance. Communications of the ACM 54(12), 92–103 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  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)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. de Bruijn, J., Bonnard, P., Citeau, H., Dehors, S., Heymans, S., Pührer, J., Eiter, T.: Combinations of rules and ontologies: State-of-the-art survey of issues. Technical Report Ontorule D3.1, Ontorule Project Consortium (2009), http://ontorule-project.eu/

  7. de Bruijn, J., Eiter, T., Tompits, H.: Embedding approaches to combining rules and ontologies into autoepistemic logic. In: KR 2008, pp. 485–495. AAAI Press (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  8. de Bruijn, J., Pearce, D., Polleres, A., Valverde, A.: Quantified equilibrium logic and hybrid rules. In: Marchiori, M., Pan, J.Z., de Sainte Marie, C. (eds.) RR 2007. LNCS, vol. 4524, pp. 58–72. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Eiter, T., Fink, M., Krennwallner, T., Redl, C., Schüller, P.: Exploiting unfounded sets for hex-program evaluation. In: del Cerro, L.F., Herzig, A., Mengin, J. (eds.) JELIA 2012. LNCS, vol. 7519, pp. 160–175. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Eiter, T., Fink, M., Stepanova, D.: Semantic independence in DL-programs. In: Krötzsch, M., Straccia, U. (eds.) RR 2012. LNCS, vol. 7497, pp. 58–74. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Eiter, T., Ianni, G., Lukasiewicz, T., Schindlauer, R., Tompits, H.: Combining answer set programming with description logics for the semantic web. Artificial Intelligence 172(12-13), 1495–1539 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Eiter, T., Ianni, G., Schindlauer, R., Tompits, H.: A uniform integration of higher-order reasoning and external evaluations in answer-set programming. In: IJCAI 2005, pp. 90–96. Professional Book Center (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Eiter, T., Lukasiewicz, T., Ianni, G., Schindlauer, R.: Well-founded semantics for description logic programs in the semantic web. ACM TOCL 12(2), 11:1–11:41 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Fink, M., Pearce, D.: A logical semantics for description logic programs. In: Janhunen, T., Niemelä, I. (eds.) JELIA 2010. LNCS, vol. 6341, pp. 156–168. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. 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 

  16. Lee, J., Palla, R.: Integrating rules and ontologies in the first-order stable model semantics (Preliminary report). In: Delgrande, J.P., Faber, W. (eds.) LPNMR 2011. LNCS, vol. 6645, pp. 248–253. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  17. Lifschitz, V., Tang, L.R., Turner, H.: Nested expressions in logic programs. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 25(3-4), 369–389 (1999)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Motik, B., Rosati, R.: Reconciling description logics and rules. Journal of the ACM 57(5), 1–62 (2010)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Pratt-Hartmann, I.: Complexity of the two-variable fragment with counting quantifiers. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 14(3), 369–395 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Reiter, R.: A logic for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 13(1-2), 81–132 (1980)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Rosati, R.: On the decidability and complexity of integrating ontologies and rules. Journal of Web Semantics 3(1), 61–73 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Rosati, R.: DL+log: Tight integration of description logics and disjunctive datalog. In: KR 2006, pp. 68–78. AAAI Press (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Shen, Y.-D.: Well-supported semantics for description logic programs. In: IJCAI 2011, pp. 1081–1086. IJCAI/AAAI (2011)

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  25. Wang, Y., You, J.-H., Yuan, L.Y., Shen, Y.-D., Zhang, M.: The loop formula based semantics of description logic programs. TCS 415, 60–85 (2012)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Wang, Y., Eiter, T., You, JH., Yuan, L., Shen, YD. (2013). Eliminating Nonmonotonic DL-Atoms in Description Logic Programs. In: Faber, W., Lembo, D. (eds) Web Reasoning and Rule Systems. RR 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7994. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39666-3_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39666-3_13

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-39665-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-39666-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics