Description Logics with Concrete Domains and Functional Dependencies

Description Logics (DLs) with concrete domains are a useful tool in many applications. To further enhance the expressive power of such DLs, it has been proposed to add database-style key constraints. Up to now, however, only uniqueness constraints have been considered in this context, thus neglecting the second fundamental family of key constraints: functional dependencies. In this paper, we consider the basic DL with concrete domains ALC(D), extend it with functional dependencies, and analyze the impact of this extension on the decidability and complexity of reasoning. Though intuitively the expressivity of functional dependencies seems weaker than that of uniqueness constraints, we are able to show that the former have a similarly severe impact on the computational properties: reasoning is undecidable in the general case, and NExpTime-complete in some slightly restricted variants of our logic

Functional Dependencies in OWL ABox

Functional Dependency (FD) has been extensively studied in database theory. Most recently there have been some works investigating the implications of extending Description Logics with functional dependencies. In particular the OWL ontology language offers the functional property property allowing simple functional dependency to be specified. As it turns out, more complex FD specified as concept constructors has been proved to lead to undecidability in the general case, which restricts its usage as part of TBOX. This paper departs from previous ones by restricting FDs applicability to instances in the ABOX. We specify FD as a new constructor, an OWL concept. FD instances are mapped to Horn clauses and evaluated against the ABOX according to user’s desired behavior. The latter allows users to determine whether FDs should be interpreted as constraints, assertions or views. Our approach gives ontology users data guarantees usually found in databases, integrated with the ontology conceptual model

Reasoning with Individuals for the Description Logic SHIQ

While there has been a great deal of work on the development of reasoning algorithms for expressive description logics, in most cases only Tbox reasoning is considered. In this paper we present an algorithm for combined Tbox and Abox reasoning in the SHIQ description logic. This algorithm is of particular interest as it can be used to decide the problem of (database) conjunctive query containment w.r.t. a schema. Moreover, the realisation of an efficient implementation should be relatively straightforward as it can be based on an existing highly optimised implementation of the Tbox algorithm in the FaCT system.Comment: To appear at CADE-1

Keys, Nominals, and Concrete Domains

Many description logics (DLs) combine knowledge representation on an abstract, logical level with an interface to 'concrete' domains such as numbers and strings with built-in predicates such as <, +, and prefix-of. These hybrid DLs have turned out to be quite useful for reasoning about conceptual models of information systems, and as the basis for expressive ontology languages. We propose to further extend such DLs with key constraints that allow the expression of statements like 'US citizens are uniquely identified by their social security number'. Based on this idea, we introduce a number of natural description logics and perform a detailed analysis of their decidability and computational complexity. It turns out that naive extensions with key constraints easily lead to undecidability, whereas more careful extensions yield NEXPTIME-complete DLs for a variety of useful concrete domains

Extensible Knowledge Representation: the Case of Description Reasoners

This paper offers an approach to extensible knowledge representation and reasoning for a family of formalisms known as Description Logics. The approach is based on the notion of adding new concept constructors, and includes a heuristic methodology for specifying the desired extensions, as well as a modularized software architecture that supports implementing extensions. The architecture detailed here falls in the normalize-compared paradigm, and supports both intentional reasoning (subsumption) involving concepts, and extensional reasoning involving individuals after incremental updates to the knowledge base. The resulting approach can be used to extend the reasoner with specialized notions that are motivated by specific problems or application areas, such as reasoning about dates, plans, etc. In addition, it provides an opportunity to implement constructors that are not currently yet sufficiently well understood theoretically, but are needed in practice. Also, for constructors that are provably hard to reason with (e.g., ones whose presence would lead to undecidability), it allows the implementation of incomplete reasoners where the incompleteness is tailored to be acceptable for the application at hand

Reasoning for the description logic ALC with link keys

Data interlinking is a critical task for widening and enhancing linked open data. One way to tackle data interlinking is to use link keys, which generalise keys to the case of two RDF datasets described using different ontologies. Link keys specify pairs of properties to compare for finding same-as links between instances of two classes of two different datasets. Hence, they can be used for finding links. Link keys can also be considered as logical axioms just like keys, ontologies and ontology alignments. We introduce the logic ALC+LK extending the description logic ALC with link keys. It may be used to reason and infer entailed link keys that may be more useful for a particular data interlinking task. We show that link key entailment can be reduced to consistency checking without introducing the negation of link keys. For deciding the consistency of an ALC+LK ontology, we introduce a new tableau-based algorithm. Contrary to the classical ones, the completion rules concerning link keys apply to pairs of individuals not directly related. We show that this algorithm is sound, complete and always terminates

Functional dependencies in OWL ABoxes

Functional Dependency (FD) has been extensively studied in database theory. Most recently there have been some works investigating the implications of extending Description Logics with functional dependencies. In particular the OWL ontology language offers the functional property property allowing simple functional dependency to be specified. As it turns out, more complex FD specified as concept constructors has been proved to lead to undecidability in the general case, which restricts its usage as part of TBOX. This paper departs from previous ones by restricting FDs applicability to instances in the ABOX. We specify FD as a new constructor, an OWL concept. FD instances are mapped to Horn clauses and evaluated against the ABOX according to user’s desired behavior. The latter allows users to determine whether FDs should be interpreted as constraints, assertions or views. Our approach gives ontology users data guarantees usually found in databases, integrated with the ontology conceptual model

Decidable Reasoning in Terminological Knowledge Representation Systems

Terminological knowledge representation systems (TKRSs) are tools for designing and using knowledge bases that make use of terminological languages (or concept languages). We analyze from a theoretical point of view a TKRS whose capabilities go beyond the ones of presently available TKRSs. The new features studied, often required in practical applications, can be summarized in three main points. First, we consider a highly expressive terminological language, called ALCNR, including general complements of concepts, number restrictions and role conjunction. Second, we allow to express inclusion statements between general concepts, and terminological cycles as a particular case. Third, we prove the decidability of a number of desirable TKRS-deduction services (like satisfiability, subsumption and instance checking) through a sound, complete and terminating calculus for reasoning in ALCNR-knowledge bases. Our calculus extends the general technique of constraint systems. As a byproduct of the proof, we get also the result that inclusion statements in ALCNR can be simulated by terminological cycles, if descriptive semantics is adopted.Comment: See http://www.jair.org/ for any accompanying file

Maintaining Integrity Constraints in Semantic Web

As an expressive knowledge representation language for Semantic Web, Web Ontology Language (OWL) plays an important role in areas like science and commerce. The problem of maintaining integrity constraints arises because OWL employs the Open World Assumption (OWA) as well as the Non-Unique Name Assumption (NUNA). These assumptions are typically suitable for representing knowledge distributed across the Web, where the complete knowledge about a domain cannot be assumed, but make it challenging to use OWL itself for closed world integrity constraint validation. Integrity constraints (ICs) on ontologies have to be enforced; otherwise conflicting results would be derivable from the same knowledge base (KB). The current trends of incorporating ICs into OWL are based on its query language SPARQL, alternative semantics, or logic programming. These methods usually suffer from limited types of constraints they can handle, and/or inherited computational expensiveness. This dissertation presents a comprehensive and efficient approach to maintaining integrity constraints. The design enforces data consistency throughout the OWL life cycle, including the processes of OWL generation, maintenance, and interactions with other ontologies. For OWL generation, the Paraconsistent model is used to maintain integrity constraints during the relational database to OWL translation process. Then a new rule-based language with set extension is introduced as a platform to allow users to specify constraints, along with a demonstration of 18 commonly used constraints written in this language. In addition, a new constraint maintenance system, called Jena2Drools, is proposed and implemented, to show its effectiveness and efficiency. To further handle inconsistencies among multiple distributed ontologies, this work constructs a framework to break down global constraints into several sub-constraints for efficient parallel validation