Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Semantic web reasoners and languages

  • Published:
Artificial Intelligence Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Semantic web reasoners and languages enable the semantic web to function. Some of the latest reasoning models developed in the last few years are: DLP, FaCT, RACER, Pellet, MSPASS, CEL, Cerebra Engine, QuOnto, KAON2, HermiT and others. Some software tools such as Protégé, Jena and others also have been developed, which provide inferencing as well as ontology development and management environments. These reasoners usually differ in their inference procedures, supporting logic, completeness of reasoning, expressiveness and implementation languages. Various semantic web languages with increasing expressive power continue to be developed for describing web services. We survey the some of the more recent languages like OWL-S (Ontology Web Language-Schema), WSML (Web Service Modeling Language), SWRL (Semantic Web Rule Language) and others that have been tested in early use. We also survey semantic web reasoners and their relationship to these languages.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Acciarri A, Calvanese D, Giacomo GD, Lembo D, Lenzerini M, Palmieri M, Rosati R (2005) QuOnto: Querying ontologies. In: Proceedings of the 20th national conference on artificial intelligence (AAAI 2005)

  • Areces C, Bouma W, Rijke MD (1999) Description logics and feature interaction. In: Lambrix et al (eds) Proceedings of the international workshops on description logics (DL’99), Linkoping, Sweden

  • Baader F, Hollunder B (1991) KRIS: knowledge representation and inference system. SIGART Bull 2/3: 8–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baader F, Calvanese D, Giacomo GD, Fillottrani P, Franconi E, Grau BC, Horrocks I, Kaplunova A, Lembo D, Lenzerini M, Lutz C, Moller R, Parsia B, Patel-Schneider P, Rosati R, Suntisrivaraporn B, Tessaris S (2006) Formalisms for representing ontologies: state of the art survey. TONES

  • Baader F, Calvanese D, McGuinness DL, Nardi D, Patel-Schneider PF (2003) The description logic handbook. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Baader F, Horrocks I, Sattler U (2001) Description logics for the semantic web

  • Baader F, Lutz C, Suntisrivaraporn B (2006a) Efficient reasoning in EL^+. In: Proceedings of the 2006 international workshop on description logics (DL2006), CEUR-WS

  • Baader F, Lutz C, Suntisrivaraporn B (2006b) CEL—a polynomial-time reasoner for life science ontologies. In: Furbach U, Shankar N (eds) Proceedings of the 3rd international joint conference on automated reasoning (IJCAR’06). Lect Notes Artif Intell 4130:287–291

  • Berners-Lee T, Hendler J, Lassila O (2001) The semantic web. Sci Am May, 2001

  • Bertino E, Provetti A, Salvetti F (2005) Reasoning about RDF statements with default rules. In: W3C workshop on rule languages for interoperability

  • Bhoopalam K, Haarslev V (2005) Fire – Extending Racer by an Engine for SWRL Rules. http://users.encs.concordia.ca/~haarslev/publications/DL2005-Fire-a.pdf

  • Blackburn P, van Benthem J, Wolter F (eds) (2006) Handbook of modal logic. North Holland

  • Borgida A, Brachman RJ, McGuinness DL, Resnick LA (1989) CLASSIC: a structural data model for objects. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD international conference on management of data, pp 59–67

  • Brachman RJ (1977) What’s in a concept: structural foundations for semantic networks. Int J Man-Machine Stud 9/2: 127–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brachman RJ (1979) On the epistemological status of semantic networks. In: Findler NV (eds) Associative networks. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 3–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Brachman RJ, Fikes RE, Levesque HJ (1983) KRYPTON: integrating terminology and assertion. In: Proceedings of the 3th national conference on artificial intelligence (AAAI’83), pp 31–35

  • Brachman RJ, Gilbert VP, Hector J (1985) Levesque. An essential hybrid reasoning system: knowledge and symbol level accounts in KRYPTON. In: Proceedings of the 9th international joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI’85), pp 532–539

  • Bresciani P, Franconi E, Tessaris S (1995) Implementing and testing expressive description logics: preliminary report. In: Proceedings of the 1995 description logic workshop (DL’95), pp 131–139

  • De Bruijn J, Feier C, Keller U, Lara R, Polleres A, Predoiu L (2005) WSML reasoner survey. WSML working draft, http://www.wsmo.org/TR/d16/d16.2/v0.2/20050902/

  • De Bruijn J, Lausen H, Polleres A, Fensel D (2006) The web service modeling language: an overview. In: Proceedings of the 3rd European semantic web conference (ESWC2006). Lect Notes Comput Sci 4011:590–604

  • Dimitrov M, Simov A, Ognyanov D (2005) WSMO Studio—an integrated service environment for WSMO. In: Proceedings of the workshop on WSMO implementations (WIW 2005), Innsbruck, Austria, CEUR workshop proceedings. ISSN:1613-0073

  • Dresden TU (2006) A polynomial-time classifier for the description logic EL+, http://lat.inf.tu-dresden.de/systems/cel/

  • Fensel D, Harmelen FV (2001) OIL: an ontology infrastructure for the semantic web. IEEE Intell Syst 38–44

  • Filles C, GmbH S, Falkensee Ng G, Thunell A (2003) CerebraConstruct: inferences for end users. The twelfth international world wide web conference, Budapest, Hungary. http://www2003.org/cdrom/papers/poster/p087/Poster87.html

  • Fillies C, Wood-Albrecht G, Weichhardt F (2003) Pragmatic applications of the semantic web using SemTalk. Computer networks, the semantic web: an evolution for a revolution. Sci Direct 42/5: 599–615

    Google Scholar 

  • Glimm B, Horrocks I, Motik B, Stoilos G (2009) HermiT: reasoning with large ontologies, http://www.comlab.ox.ac.uk/projects/HermiT/index.html, Computing Laboratory, Oxford University

  • Gonzalez-Castillo J, Trastour D, Bartolini C (2001) Description logics for matchmaking of services. Hewlett-Packard, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Groot P, Stuckenschmidt H, Wache H (2005) Approximating description logic classification for semantic web reasoning. www.cs.vu.nl/~holger/Papers/groot_etal-05.pdf

  • Guo Y, Pan Z, Heflin J (2005) LUBM: a benchmark for OWL knowledge base systems. J Web Semantics 3: 158–192

    Google Scholar 

  • Haarslev V, Moller R (2000) Consistence testing: the RACE experience. In: Dyckhoff R (ed) Proceedings, automated reasoning with analytic tableaux and related methods. Lect Notes Artif Intell 1847:57–61

  • Hollunder B, Laux A, Profitlich HJ, Trenz T (1991) KRIS-manual. Technical report. Deutsches Forschungszentrum fur Kunstliche Intelligenz (DFKI)

  • Horrocks I (2003) The FaCT System. http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~horrocks/FaCT/, website last updated on April, 2003

  • Horrocks I (1997) Optimisation techniques for expressive description logics. Technical report UMCS-97-2-1, University of Manchester, Department of Computer Science

  • Horrocks I (2001) DAML+OIL: a description logic for the semantic Web. Bull IEEE Comput Soc Techn Committee Data Eng 1–7

  • Horrocks I (2005) Description logics in ontology applications. In: Beckert B (ed) Proceedings of the 9th international conference on automated reasoning with analytic tableaux and related methods (TABLEAUX 2005). Lect Notes Artif Intell 3702:2–13

  • Horrocks I, Tobies S (2000) Reasoning with axioms: theory and practice. In: Cohn et al. (ed) Internatinal conference on principles of knowledge representation and reasoning (KR’2000), pp 283–296

  • Horrocks I, Patel-Schneider PF, Bechhofer S, Tsarkov D (2005) OWL rules: a proposal and prototype implementation. Web Semantics 3/1: 23–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Horrocks I, Patel-Schneider PF, Boley H, Tabet S, Grosof B, Dean M (2004) SWRL: a semantic web rule language combining OWL and RuleML, http://www.w3.org/Submission/2004/SUBM-SWRL-20040521/

  • Hustadt U, Schmidt RA (2000) MSPASS: modal reasoning by translation and first-order resolution. In: Dyckhoff R (ed) Automated reasoning with analytic tableaux and related methods (TABLEAUX 2000). Lect Notes Artif Intell 1847:67–71

  • Kaczmarek TS, Bates R, Robins G (1986) Recent developments in NIKL. In: AAAI-86 Proceedings, www.aaai.org

  • Kerrigan M (2005) The WSML editor plug-in to the web services modeling toolkit. In: Proceedings of the 2nd WSMO implementation workshop (WIW2005). Innsbruck, Austria

  • Kifer M, Lausen G, Wu J (1995) Logical foundations of object-oriented and frame-based languages. J Assoc Comput Machinery 1–104

  • Kopena J, Regil WC (2003) DAMLJessKB: a tool for reasoning with the semantic web. IEEE Intelligent Systems, IEEE Computer Society, IEEE, pp 74–77

  • Lara R, Polleres A, Lausen H, Roman D, de Bruijn J, Fensel D (2005) A conceptual comparison between WSMO and OWL-S. Final draft D4.1v0.1, WSMO. http://www.wsmo.org/TR/d4/d4.1/v0.1/

  • Lenzerini M, Schaerf A (1991) Concept languages as query languages. In: Proceedings of the 9th national conference on artificial intelligence (AAAI’91), pp 471–476

  • MacGregor R, Brill D (1992) Recognition algorithms for the LOOM classifier. In: Proceedings of the 10th national conference on artificial intelligence (AAAI’92). AAAI Press/The MIT Press, pp 774–779

  • MacGregor R (1988) A deductive pattern matcher. In: Proceedings of the 7th national conference on artificial intelligence (AAAI’88), pp 403-408

  • MacGregor R (1991) The evolving technology of classification-based knowledge representation systems. In: Sowa JF (eds) Principles of SemanticNetworks. Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos, pp 385–400

    Google Scholar 

  • MacGregor R, Bates R (1987) The loom knowledge representation language. Technical report ISI/RS-87-188, University of Southern California, Information Science Institute, Marina del Rey (CA, USA)

  • Manola F, Miller E (2004) RDF primer. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-prime/

  • Marchiori M (2004) Towards a people’s web: metalog. http://www.w3.org/People/Massimo/papers/2004/wi2004.pdf

  • Martin D (2002) DAML-S: Semantic markup for web services. http://www.daml.org/services/daml-s/0.7/daml-s.html#foot27, web site last updated Oct, 2002

  • Martin D (2003) OWL-S: semantic markup for web services. The OWL Services Coalition

  • McAllester DA (1982) Reasoning utility package user’s manual. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Technical report

  • McGuinness DL, Fikes R, Hendler J, Stein LA (2002) DAML+OIL: an ontology language for the semantic web. IEEE Intelligent Systems, IEEE, pp 72–80

  • Meditskos G, Bassiliades N (2008) A rule-based object-oriented OWL reasoner. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 20/3: 397–410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Motik B, Sattler U (2006) A comparison of reasoning techniques for querying large description logic ABoxes. In: Proceedings of the 13th international conference on logic for programming artificial intelligence and reasoning (LPAR 2006), Phnom Penh, Cambodia

  • Motik B (2007) KAON2. http://kaon2.semanticweb.org/, website accessed on Feb 15, 07

  • Nebel B (1988) Computational complexity of terminological reasoning in BACK. Artif Intell 34/3: 371–383

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Nebel B (1990) Terminological reasoning is inherently intractable. Artif Intell 43: 235–249

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Neuwirth A (1993) Inferences for temporal object descriptions in a terminological representation system. KIT-report 107, Fachbereich Informatik, Technische Universität Berlin, Berlin (Germany)

  • O’Connor M, Tu S, Nyulas C, Das A, Musen M (2007) Querying the semantic web with SWRL. http://bmir.stanford.edu/file_asset/index.php/1125/RuleML2007DemoFinalSubmit.pdf

  • Parsia B, Sirin E (2003) Pellet: an OWL DL reasoner. MINDSWAP Research Group, Supporting Reasoners and Softwares

  • Patel-Schneider PF (1984) Small can be beautiful in knowledge representation. In: Proceedings of the IEEE workshop on knowledge-based systems, 1984. An extended version appeared as Fairchild technical report 660 and FLAIR technical report 37

  • Patel-Schneider PF (1987) Decidable, logic-based knowledge representation. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada, Available as Technical report 201/87

  • Patel-Schneider PF (1998) The classic family of knowledge representation systems. http://www.bell-labs.com/project/classic/, website last updated Nov, 1998

  • Patel-Schneider PF (1999) DLP. In Proc. of the 1999 Description Logic Workshop (DL’99), CEUR Electronic Workshop Proceedings, , pp 9–13. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-22/

  • Patel-Schneider PF (2000) NeoClassic: the C++ version of classic. http://www.bell-labs.com/project/classic/neo.html, website last updated Oct, 2000

  • Patel-Schneider PF (2000a) The DLP experimental description logic system and propositional modal logic satisfiability checker. http://www-db-out.bell-labs.com/user/pfps/dlp/, website last updated Jan, 2000

  • Payne T, Tamma V (2005) Towards semantic web agents: Knowledge Web and AgentLink. Cambridge University Press, UK. Knowl Eng Rev 20(2):191–196

  • Peltason C (1991) The BACK system–an overview. SIGART Bull 2(3): 114–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Predoiu L, Grimm S (2005) Reasoner technology scan and recommendation. Data, information and process integration with semantic web services, FP6-507483, http://dip.semanticweb.org/

  • Quantz J, Kindermann C (1990) Implementation of the BACK system version 4, KIT-Report 78, Fachbereich Informatik, Technische Universität Berlin, Berlin

  • Quantz J, Dunker G, Bergmann F, Kellner I (1995) The FLEX system, KIT-Report 124, Fachbereich Informatik, Technische Universität Berlin, Berlin

  • Quantz J, Royer V (1992) A preference semantics for defaults in terminological logics. In Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on the principles of knowledge representation and reasoning (KR’92), Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos, pp 294–305

  • Roman D, Keller U, Lausen H, Josde Bruijn RL, Stollberg M, Polleres A, Feier C, Bussler C, Fensel D (2005) Web service modeling ontology. Appl Ontol 1/1: 77–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Sattler U (2007) Description logic reasoners. http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~sattler/reasoners.html, website accessed on Feb 19, 2007

  • Schild K (1993) Combining terminological logics with tense logic. In: Proceedings of the 6th Portuguese conference on artificial intelligence (EPIA’93). Lect Notes Comput Sci 727:105–120

  • Schmidt R (1991) Algebraic terminological representation. Technical report, Max Planck Institute for Computer Science, MPI-Report MPI-I-91-216

  • Schmidt RA (2007) MSPASS: documentation. http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~schmidt/mspass/documentation.html, website last modified Feb, 2007

  • SeanBechhofer, Harmelen FV, Hendler J, Horrocks I, McGuinness DL, Patel-Schneider PF, Stein LA (2004) OWL web ontology language reference. http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-ref-20040210/

  • Steele G (1990) Common Lisp, the language, 2nd edn. Digital Press

  • Tsarkov D, Horrocks I (2006) FaCT++ description logic reasoner: system description. www.cs.man.ac.uk/~horrocks/Publications/download/2006/TsHo06a.pdf, 2006

  • Vilain M (1985) The restricted language architecture of a hybrid representation system. In: Proceedings of the 9th international joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI’85), Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos, pp 547–551

  • Vilas W, Chutiporn A, Ekawit N (1998) Reasoning about RDF elements. In: Proceedings of international joint workshop on digital libraries

  • Yen J, Neches R, MacGregor R (1991) CLASP: integrating term subsumption systems and production systems. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 3/1: 25–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Engineering, Institute of Technology, Banaras Hindu University (IT-BHU), Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, 221005, India

    R. B. Mishra & Sandeep Kumar

  2. Department of Information Technology, M. M. Engineering College, M. M. University, Mullana, Ambala, India

    Sandeep Kumar

Authors
  1. R. B. Mishra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sandeep Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sandeep Kumar.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mishra, R.B., Kumar, S. Semantic web reasoners and languages. Artif Intell Rev 35, 339–368 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-010-9197-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-010-9197-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation