Abstract
In this paper, we investigate the (in)dependence among OWL documents with respect to the logical consequence when they are combined, in particular the inference of concept and role assertions about individuals. On the one hand, we present a systematic approach to identifying those documents that affect the inference of a given fact. On the other hand, we consider ways for fast detection of independence. First, we demonstrate several special cases in which two documents are independent of each other. Secondly, we introduce an algorithm for checking the independence in the general case. In addition, we describe two applications in which the above results have allowed us to develop novel approaches to overcome some difficulties in reasoning with large scale OWL data. Both applications demonstrate the usefulness of this work for improving the scalability of a practical Semantic Web system that relies on the reasoning about individuals.
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
References
Amir, E., McIlraith, S.: Partition-Based Logical Reasoning for First-Order and Propositional Theories. Artificial Intelligence journal (2003)
Borgida, A., Serafini, L.: Distributed Description Logics - Assimilating Information from Peer Sources. Journal of Data Semantics (1) (2003)
Darwiche, A.: A logical notion of conditional independence: properties and applications. Artificial Intelligence 97(1-2), 45–82 (1997)
Dean, M., Schreiber, G. (eds.): OWL Web Ontology Language Reference, W3C Recommendation (February 10, 2004), http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-ref-20040210/
Elhaik, Q., Rousset, M.-C.: Making an ABox persistent. In: Proc. of the 1998 Description Logic Workshop, DL 1998 (1998)
Greiner, R., Pearl, J., Subramanian, D. (eds.): Artificial Intelligence, vol. 97 (1–2) (1997) (Special Issue on Relevance)
Guo, Y., Pan, Z., Heflin, J.: An Evaluation of Knowledge Base Systems for Large OWL Datasets. In: McIlraith, S.A., Plexousakis, D., van Harmelen, F. (eds.) ISWC 2004. LNCS, vol. 3298, pp. 274–288. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
Guo, Y., Heflin, J.: An Initial Investigation into Querying an Untrustworthy and Inconsistent Web. In: ISWC 2004 Workshop on Trust, Security and Reputation on the Semantic Web (2004)
Haarslev, V., Möller, R.: A Core Inference Engine for the Semantic Web. In: Workshop on Evaluation on Ontology-based Tools, ISWC 2003 (2003)
Haarslev, V., Möller, R.: Optimization Techniques for Retrieving Resources Described in OWL/RDF Documents: First Results. In: Proc. of Ninth International Conference on the Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, KR 2004 (2004)
Haarslev, V., Möller, R., Wessel, M.: Querying the Semantic Web with Racer + nRQL. In: Proc. of the Workshop on Description Logics 2004, ADL 2004 (2004)
Horrocks, I.: The faCT system. In: de Swart, H. (ed.) TABLEAUX 1998. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1397, p. 307. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)
Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.F.: Reducing OWL entailment to description logic satisfiability. J. of Web Semantics 1(4), 345–357 (2004)
Lang, J., Liberatore, P., Marquis, P.: Conditional independence in propositional logic. Artificial Intelligence Journal 141(1), 79–121 (2002)
Lang, J., Liberatore, P., Marquis, P.: Propositional independence: formula-variable independence and forgetting. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 18, 391–443 (2003)
Levesque, H.: A completeness result for reasoning with incomplete knowledge bases. In: Proc. of KR 1998, Sixth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (1998)
Levy, A.Y., Fikes, R.E., Sagiv, Y.: Speeding up inferences using relevance reasoning: a formalism and algorithms. Artificial Intelligence 97(1-2), 83–136 (1997)
McGuinness, D.L., Borgida, A.: Explaining Subsumption in Description Logics. In: Proc. of the 14th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (1995)
Patel-Schneider, P.F. (ed.): OWL Web Ontology Language Semantics and Abstract Syntax, http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/
Royer, V., Quantz, J.J.: Deriving Inference Rules for Terminological Logics. In: Pearce, D.J., Wagner, G. (eds.) JELIA 1992. LNCS, vol. 633. Springer, Heidelberg (1992)
Royer, V., Quantz, J.J.: Deriving Inference Rules for Description Logics: a Rewriting Approach into Sequent Calculi. KIT REPORT 111 (December 1993)
Tsarkov, D., Horrocks, I.: DL reasoner vs. first-order prover. In: Proc. of the, Description Logic Workshop (DL 2003)
W3C RDF. Resource Description Framework (RDF), http://www.w3.org/RDF/
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Guo, Y., Heflin, J. (2005). On Logical Consequence for Collections of OWL Documents. In: Gil, Y., Motta, E., Benjamins, V.R., Musen, M.A. (eds) The Semantic Web – ISWC 2005. ISWC 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3729. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11574620_26
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11574620_26
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-29754-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-32082-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)