Abstract
After becoming a W3C Recommendation, OWL is becoming increasingly widely accepted and used. However most people still find it difficult to create and use OWL ontologies. On major difficulty is “debugging” the ontologies – discovering why a reasoners has inferred that a class is “unsatisfiable” (inconsistent). Even for people who do understand OWL and the logical meaning of the underlining description logic, discovering why concepts are unsatisfiable can be difficult. Most modern tableaux reasoners do not provide any explanation as to why the classes are unsatisfiable. This paper presents a ‘black boxed’ heuristic approach based on identifying common errors and inferences.
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
Bechhoffer, S.: The dig description logic interface: Dig/1.1. Technical report, The University Of Manchester, The University Of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PL (2003)
Bechoffer, S., van Harmlen, F., Hendler, J., Horrocks, I., McGuinnes, D., Patel-Schneider, P., Stein, L.A.: Owl web ontology langauge reference (February 2004)
Borgida, A., Franconi, E., Horrocks, I., McGuinness, D., Patel-Schneider, P.: Explaining alc subsumption. In: Description Logics (1999)
Parsia, B., Sirin, E.: Pellet: An owl dl reasoner. In: Moller, R., Haaslev, V. (eds.) Proceedings of the International Workshop on Description Logics (DL 2004) (June 2004)
Rector, A., Knublauch, H., Musen, M.: Editing description logic ontologies with the protege-owl plugin. In: International Workshop on Description Logics - DL 2004 (2004)
Horridge, M., Knublauch, H., Rector, A., Stevens, R., Wroe, C.: A practical guide to building owl ontologies using protégé-owl and the co-ode tools (2004), Available from http://www.co-ode.org/resources
Horrocks, I.: Fact++ web site, http://owl.man.ac.uk/factplusplus/
Horrocks, I.: The fact system. In: de Swart, H. (ed.) TABLEAUX 1998. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1397, pp. 307–312. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)
Liebig, T., Noppens, O.: Ontotrack: Combining browsing and editing with reasoning and explaining for owl lite ontologies. In: McIlraith, S.A., et al. (eds.) ISWC 2004. LNCS, vol. 3298, pp. 244–258. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
Rector, A.L., Drummond, N., Horridge, M., Rogers, J., Knublauch, H., Stevens, R., Wang, H., Wroe, C.: Owl pizzas: Practical experience of teaching owl-dl: Common errors and common patterns. In: Proceedings of Engineering Knowledge in the Age of the Semantic Web 2004 (2004)
Moller, R., Haarslev, V.: Racer system description. In: Goré, R.P., Leitsch, A., Nipkow, T. (eds.) IJCAR 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2083, p. 701. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)
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
Wang, H., Horridge, M., Rector, A., Drummond, N., Seidenberg, J. (2005). Debugging OWL-DL Ontologies: A Heuristic Approach. 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_53
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11574620_53
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)