Uniform Interpolation and Forgetting for ALC Ontologies with ABoxes

Uniform interpolation and the dual task of forgetting restrict the ontology to a specified subset of concept and role names. This makes them useful tools for ontology analysis, ontology evolution and information hiding. Most previous research focused on uniform interpolation of TBoxes. However, especially for applications in privacy and information hiding, it is essential that uniform interpolation methods can deal with ABoxes as well. We present the first method that can compute uniform interpolants of any ALC ontology with ABoxes. ABoxes bring their own challenges when computing uniform interpolants, possibly requiring disjunctive statements or nominals in the resulting ABox. Our method can compute representations of uniform interpolants in ALCO. An evaluation on realistic ontologies shows that these uniform interpolants can be practically computed, and can often even be presented in pure ALC

Living Without Beth and Craig: Definitions and Interpolants in Description Logics with Nominals and Role Inclusions

The Craig interpolation property (CIP) states that an interpolant for an implication exists iff it is valid. The projective Beth definability property (PBDP) states that an explicit definition exists iff a formula stating implicit definability is valid. Thus, the CIP and PBDP transform potentially hard existence problems into deduction problems in the underlying logic. Description Logics with nominals and/or role inclusions do not enjoy the CIP nor PBDP, but interpolants and explicit definitions have many potential applications in ontology engineering and ontology-based data management. In this article we show the following: even without Craig and Beth, the existence of interpolants and explicit definitions is decidable in description logics with nominals and/or role inclusions such as ALCO, ALCH and ALCHIO. However, living without Craig and Beth makes this problem harder than deduction: we prove that the existence problems become 2ExpTime-complete, thus one exponential harder than validity. The existence of explicit definitions is 2ExpTime-hard even if one asks for a definition of a nominal using any symbol distinct from that nominal, but it becomes ExpTime-complete if one asks for a definition of a concept name using any symbol distinct from that concept name.Comment: We have added results on description logics with role inclusions and an ExpTime-completeness result for the explicit definability of concept names. The title has been modified by adding role inclusions. This paper has been accepted for AAAA 202

Interpolants and Explicit Definitions in Extensions of the Description Logic EL

We show that the vast majority of extensions of the description logic EL do not enjoy the Craig interpolation nor the projective Beth definability property. This is the case, for example, for EL with nominals, EL with the universal role, EL with role hierarchies and transitive roles, and for ELI. It follows in particular that the existence of an explicit definition of a concept or individual name cannot be reduced to subsumption checking via implicit definability. We show that nevertheless the existence of interpolants and explicit definitions can be decided in polynomial time for standard tractable extensions of EL (such as EL++) and in ExpTime for ELI and various extensions. It follows that these existence problems are not harder than subsumption which is in sharp contrast to the situation for expressive DLs. We also obtain tight bounds for the size of interpolants and explicit definitions and the complexity of computing them: single exponential for tractable standard extensions of EL and double exponential for ELI and extensions. We close with a discussion of Horn-DLs such as Horn-ALCI.</jats:p

Interpolants and Explicit Definitions in Extensions of the Description Logic EL

We show that the vast majority of extensions of the description logic $\mathcal{EL}$ do not enjoy the Craig interpolation nor the projective Beth definability property. This is the case, for example, for $\mathcal{EL}$ with nominals, $\mathcal{EL}$ with the universal role, $\mathcal{EL}$ with a role inclusion of the form $r\circ s\sqsubseteq s$, and for $\mathcal{ELI}$. It follows in particular that the existence of an explicit definition of a concept or individual name cannot be reduced to subsumption checking via implicit definability. We show that nevertheless the existence of interpolants and explicit definitions can be decided in polynomial time for standard tractable extensions of $\mathcal{EL}$ (such as $\mathcal{EL}^{++}$) and in ExpTime for $\mathcal{ELI}$ and various extensions. It follows that these existence problems are not harder than subsumption which is in sharp contrast to the situation for expressive DLs. We also obtain tight bounds for the size of interpolants and explicit definitions and the complexity of computing them: single exponential for tractable standard extensions of $\mathcal{EL}$ and double exponential for $\mathcal{ELI}$ and extensions. We close with a discussion of Horn-DLs such as Horn-$\mathcal{ALCI}$

Living Without Beth and Craig: Definitions and Interpolants in Description and Modal Logics with Nominals and Role Inclusions

The Craig interpolation property (CIP) states that an interpolant for an implication exists iff it is valid. The projective Beth definability property (PBDP) states that an explicit definition exists iff a formula stating implicit definability is valid. Thus, the CIP and PBDP reduce potentially hard existence problems to entailment in the underlying logic. Description (and modal) logics with nominals and/or role inclusions do not enjoy the CIP nor the PBDP, but interpolants and explicit definitions have many applications, in particular in concept learning, ontology engineering, and ontology-based data management. In this article we show that, even without Beth and Craig, the existence of interpolants and explicit definitions is decidable in description logics with nominals and/or role inclusions such as $\mathcal {ALCO}$ , $\mathcal {ALCH}$ and $\mathcal {ALCHOI}$ and corresponding hybrid modal logics. However, living without Beth and Craig makes these problems harder than entailment: the existence problems become 2ExpTime-complete in the presence of an ontology or the universal modality, and coNExpTime-complete otherwise. We also analyze explicit definition existence if all symbols (except the one that is defined) are admitted in the definition. In this case the complexity depends on whether one considers individual or concept names. Finally, we consider the problem of computing interpolants and explicit definitions if they exist and turn the complexity upper bound proof into an algorithm computing them, at least for description logics with role inclusions. </jats:p