A preliminary framework for reasoning with inconsistent possibilistic description logics ontologies with disjunctive assertions

We present a preliminary framework for reasoning with possibilistic description logics ontologies with disjunctive assertions (PDLDA ontologies for short). PDLDA ontologies are composed of a terminology as well as an assertional box that allows to declare three kinds of assertional statements: an individual is a member of one concept, two individuals are related through a role, an individual is a member of the union of two or more concepts or two individuals are related through the union of two or more roles. Each axiom in the ontologies has a certainty degree as is usual in possibilistic logics. For reasoning with PDLDA ontologies, we interpret them in terms of a adaptation of Bodanza's Suppositional Argumentation System. Our framework allows to reason with modus ponens and constructive dilemmas. We use it for determining the membership of individuals to concepts when there is doubt to exactly which one of the concepts in the union the individual belongs. We think that our approach will be of use for implementers of reasoning systems in the Semantic Web where uncertainty of membership of individuals to concepts or roles is present.XVI Workshop Agentes y Sistemas Inteligentes (WASI)Red de Universidades con Carreras en Informática (RedUNCI

A preliminary framework for reasoning with inconsistent possibilistic description logics ontologies with disjunctive assertions

We present a preliminary framework for reasoning with possibilistic description logics ontologies with disjunctive assertions (PDLDA ontologies for short). PDLDA ontologies are composed of a terminology as well as an assertional box that allows to declare three kinds of assertional statements: an individual is a member of one concept, two individuals are related through a role, an individual is a member of the union of two or more concepts or two individuals are related through the union of two or more roles. Each axiom in the ontologies has a certainty degree as is usual in possibilistic logics. For reasoning with PDLDA ontologies, we interpret them in terms of a adaptation of Bodanza's Suppositional Argumentation System. Our framework allows to reason with modus ponens and constructive dilemmas. We use it for determining the membership of individuals to concepts when there is doubt to exactly which one of the concepts in the union the individual belongs. We think that our approach will be of use for implementers of reasoning systems in the Semantic Web where uncertainty of membership of individuals to concepts or roles is present.XVI Workshop Agentes y Sistemas Inteligentes (WASI)Red de Universidades con Carreras en Informática (RedUNCI

Handling inconsistency on ontologies through a generalized dynamic argumentation framework

In this article we present a generalized dynamic argumentation framework that handles arguments expressed in an abstract language assumed to be some first order logic fragment. Once the formalism is presented, we propose a reification to the description logic ALC with the intention to handle ontology debugging. In this sense, since argumentation frameworks reason over graphs that relate arguments through attack, our methodology is proposed to bridge ontological inconsistency sources to attack relations in argumentation. Finally, an argumentation semantics is proposed as a consistency restoration tool to cope with the ontology debugging.Workshop de Agentes y Sistemas Inteligentes (WASI)Red de Universidades con Carreras en Informática (RedUNCI

Reasoning with inconsistent possibilistic description logics ontologies with disjunctive assertions

We present a preliminary framework for reasoning with possibilistic description logics ontologies with disjunctive assertions (PoDLoDA ontologies for short). Given a PoDLoDA ontology, its terminological box is expressed in the description logic programming fragment but its assertional box allows four kinds of statements: an individual is a member of a concept, two individuals are related through a role, an individual is a member of the union of two or more concepts or two individuals are related through the union of two or more roles. Axioms and statements in PoDLoDA ontologies have a numerical certainty degree attached. A disjunctive assertion expresses a doubt respect to the membership of either individuals to union of concepts or pairs of individuals to the union of roles. Because PoDLoDA ontologies allow to represent incomplete and potentially inconsistent information, instance checking is addressed through an adaptation of Bodanza’s Suppositional Argumentation System that allows to reason with modus ponens and constructive dilemmas. We think that our approach will be of use for implementers of reasoning systems in the Semantic Web where uncertainty of membership of individuals to concepts or roles is present.Facultad de Informátic

Reasoning with inconsistent possibilistic description logics ontologies with disjunctive assertions

We present a preliminary framework for reasoning with possibilistic description logics ontologies with disjunctive assertions (PoDLoDA ontologies for short). Given a PoDLoDA ontology, its terminological box is expressed in the description logic programming fragment but its assertional box allows four kinds of statements: an individual is a member of a concept, two individuals are related through a role, an individual is a member of the union of two or more concepts or two individuals are related through the union of two or more roles. Axioms and statements in PoDLoDA ontologies have a numerical certainty degree attached. A disjunctive assertion expresses a doubt respect to the membership of either individuals to union of concepts or pairs of individuals to the union of roles. Because PoDLoDA ontologies allow to represent incomplete and potentially inconsistent information, instance checking is addressed through an adaptation of Bodanza’s Suppositional Argumentation System that allows to reason with modus ponens and constructive dilemmas. We think that our approach will be of use for implementers of reasoning systems in the Semantic Web where uncertainty of membership of individuals to concepts or roles is present.Facultad de Informátic

An Argumentation-Based Legal Reasoning Approach for DL-Ontology

Ontology is a popular method for knowledge representation in different domains, including the legal domain, and description logics (DL) is commonly used as its description language. To handle reasoning based on inconsistent DL-based legal ontologies, the current paper presents a structured argumentation framework particularly for reasoning in legal contexts on the basis of ASPIC+, and translates the legal ontology into formulas and rules of an argumentation theory. With a particular focus on the design of autonomous vehicles from the perspective of legal AI, we show that using this combined theory of formal argumentation and DL-based legal ontology, acceptable assertions can be obtained based on inconsistent ontologies, and the traditional reasoning tasks of DL ontologies can also be accomplished. In addition, a formal definition of explanations for the result of reasoning is presented.Comment: 16 pages, 1 figur

Governance of Autonomous Agents on the Web: Challenges and Opportunities

International audienceThe study of autonomous agents has a long tradition in the Multiagent System and the Semantic Web communities, with applications ranging from automating business processes to personal assistants. More recently, the Web of Things (WoT), which is an extension of the Internet of Things (IoT) with metadata expressed in Web standards, and its community provide further motivation for pushing the autonomous agents research agenda forward. Although representing and reasoning about norms, policies and preferences is crucial to ensuring that autonomous agents act in a manner that satisfies stakeholder requirements, normative concepts, policies and preferences have yet to be considered as first-class abstractions in Web-based multiagent systems. Towards this end, this paper motivates the need for alignment and joint research across the Multiagent Systems, Semantic Web, and WoT communities, introduces a conceptual framework for governance of autonomous agents on the Web, and identifies several research challenges and opportunities

Handling inconsistency on ontologies through a generalized dynamic argumentation framework

In this article we present a generalized dynamic argumentation framework that handles arguments expressed in an abstract language assumed to be some first order logic fragment. Once the formalism is presented, we propose a reification to the description logic ALC with the intention to handle ontology debugging. In this sense, since argumentation frameworks reason over graphs that relate arguments through attack, our methodology is proposed to bridge ontological inconsistency sources to attack relations in argumentation. Finally, an argumentation semantics is proposed as a consistency restoration tool to cope with the ontology debugging.Workshop de Agentes y Sistemas Inteligentes (WASI)Red de Universidades con Carreras en Informática (RedUNCI

A preliminary framework for reasoning with inconsistent possibilistic description logics ontologies with disjunctive assertions

We present a preliminary framework for reasoning with possibilistic description logics ontologies with disjunctive assertions (PDLDA ontologies for short). PDLDA ontologies are composed of a terminology as well as an assertional box that allows to declare three kinds of assertional statements: an individual is a member of one concept, two individuals are related through a role, an individual is a member of the union of two or more concepts or two individuals are related through the union of two or more roles. Each axiom in the ontologies has a certainty degree as is usual in possibilistic logics. For reasoning with PDLDA ontologies, we interpret them in terms of a adaptation of Bodanza's Suppositional Argumentation System. Our framework allows to reason with modus ponens and constructive dilemmas. We use it for determining the membership of individuals to concepts when there is doubt to exactly which one of the concepts in the union the individual belongs. We think that our approach will be of use for implementers of reasoning systems in the Semantic Web where uncertainty of membership of individuals to concepts or roles is present.XVI Workshop Agentes y Sistemas Inteligentes (WASI)Red de Universidades con Carreras en Informática (RedUNCI

Reasoning with inconsistent ontologies in possibilistic defeasible logic programming

We present a preliminary framework for reasoning with possibly inconsistent Description Logic ontologies in Possibilistic Defeasible Logic Programming. A case study is presented where we show how the proposed approach works. The proposal presented is apt for being used in the context of Semantic Web ontologies as it can be applied to the Web Ontology Language OWLPresentado en el XII Workshop Agentes y Sistemas Inteligentes (WASI)Red de Universidades con Carreras en Informática (RedUNCI