Temporalised Description Logics for Monitoring Partially Observable Events

Inevitably, it becomes more and more important to verify that the systems surrounding us have certain properties. This is indeed unavoidable for safety-critical systems such as power plants and intensive-care units. We refer to the term system in a broad sense: it may be man-made (e.g. a computer system) or natural (e.g. a patient in an intensive-care unit). Whereas in Model Checking it is assumed that one has complete knowledge about the functioning of the system, we consider an open-world scenario and assume that we can only observe the behaviour of the actual running system by sensors. Such an abstract sensor could sense e.g. the blood pressure of a patient or the air traffic observed by radar. Then the observed data are preprocessed appropriately and stored in a fact base. Based on the data available in the fact base, situation-awareness tools are supposed to help the user to detect certain situations that require intervention by an expert. Such situations could be that the heart-rate of a patient is rather high while the blood pressure is low, or that a collision of two aeroplanes is about to happen. Moreover, the information in the fact base can be used by monitors to verify that the system has certain properties. It is not realistic, however, to assume that the sensors always yield a complete description of the current state of the observed system. Thus, it makes sense to assume that information that is not present in the fact base is unknown rather than false. Moreover, very often one has some knowledge about the functioning of the system. This background knowledge can be used to draw conclusions about the possible future behaviour of the system. Employing description logics (DLs) is one way to deal with these requirements. In this thesis, we tackle the sketched problem in three different contexts: (i) runtime verification using a temporalised DL, (ii) temporalised query entailment, and (iii) verification in DL-based action formalisms

Action, Time and Space in Description Logics

Description Logics (DLs) are a family of logic-based knowledge representation (KR) formalisms designed to represent and reason about static conceptual knowledge in a semantically well-understood way. On the other hand, standard action formalisms are KR formalisms based on classical logic designed to model and reason about dynamic systems. The largest part of the present work is dedicated to integrating DLs with action formalisms, with the main goal of obtaining decidable action formalisms with an expressiveness significantly beyond propositional. To this end, we offer DL-tailored solutions to the frame and ramification problem. One of the main technical results is that standard reasoning problems about actions (executability and projection), as well as the plan existence problem are decidable if one restricts the logic for describing action pre- and post-conditions and the state of the world to decidable Description Logics. A smaller part of the work is related to decidable extensions of Description Logics with concrete datatypes, most importantly with those allowing to refer to the notions of space and time

Action Logic Programs: How to Specify Strategic Behavior in Dynamic Domains Using Logical Rules

We discuss a new concept of agent programs that combines logic programming with reasoning about actions. These agent logic programs are characterized by a clear separation between the specification of the agent’s strategic behavior and the underlying theory about the agent’s actions and their effects. This makes it a generic, declarative agent programming language, which can be combined with an action representation formalism of one’s choice. We present a declarative semantics for agent logic programs along with (two versions of) a sound and complete operational semantics, which combines the standard inference mechanisms for (constraint) logic programs with reasoning about actions

Pseudo-contractions as Gentle Repairs

Updating a knowledge base to remove an unwanted consequence is a challenging task. Some of the original sentences must be either deleted or weakened in such a way that the sentence to be removed is no longer entailed by the resulting set. On the other hand, it is desirable that the existing knowledge be preserved as much as possible, minimising the loss of information. Several approaches to this problem can be found in the literature. In particular, when the knowledge is represented by an ontology, two different families of frameworks have been developed in the literature in the past decades with numerous ideas in common but with little interaction between the communities: applications of AGM-like Belief Change and justification-based Ontology Repair. In this paper, we investigate the relationship between pseudo-contraction operations and gentle repairs. Both aim to avoid the complete deletion of sentences when replacing them with weaker versions is enough to prevent the entailment of the unwanted formula. We show the correspondence between concepts on both sides and investigate under which conditions they are equivalent. Furthermore, we propose a unified notation for the two approaches, which might contribute to the integration of the two areas

Saturation-based decision procedures for extensions of the guarded fragment

We apply the framework of Bachmair and Ganzinger for saturation-based theorem proving to derive a range of decision procedures for logical formalisms, starting with a simple terminological language EL, which allows for conjunction and existential restrictions only, and ending with extensions of the guarded fragment with equality, constants, functionality, number restrictions and compositional axioms of form S ◦ T ⊆ H. Our procedures are derived in a uniform way using standard saturation-based calculi enhanced with simplification rules based on the general notion of redundancy. We argue that such decision procedures can be applied for reasoning in expressive description logics, where they have certain advantages over traditionally used tableau procedures, such as optimal worst-case complexity and direct correctness proofs.Wir wenden das Framework von Bachmair und Ganzinger für saturierungsbasiertes Theorembeweisen an, um eine Reihe von Entscheidungsverfahren für logische Formalismen abzuleiten, angefangen von einer simplen terminologischen Sprache EL, die nur Konjunktionen und existentielle Restriktionen erlaubt, bis zu Erweiterungen des Guarded Fragment mit Gleichheit, Konstanten, Funktionalität, Zahlenrestriktionen und Kompositionsaxiomen der Form S ◦ T ⊆ H. Unsere Verfahren sind einheitlich abgeleitet unter Benutzung herkömmlicher saturierungsbasierter Kalküle, verbessert durch Simplifikationsregeln, die auf dem Konzept der Redundanz basieren. Wir argumentieren, daß solche Entscheidungsprozeduren für das Beweisen in ausdrucksvollen Beschreibungslogiken angewendet werden können, wo sie gewisse Vorteile gegenüber traditionell benutzten Tableauverfahren besitzen, wie z.B. optimale worst-case Komplexität und direkte Korrektheitsbeweise

Modularity Through Inseparability : Algorithms, Extensions, and Evaluation

Module extraction is the task of computing, given a description logic ontology and a signature ∑ of interest, a subset (called a module) such that for certain applications that only concern ∑ the ontology can be equivalently replaced by the module. In most applications of module extraction it is desirable to compute a module which is as small as possible, and where possible a minimal one. In logic-based approaches to module extraction the most popular way to define modules is using inseparability relations, the strongest and most robust notion of this being model ∑-inseparability, where two ontologies are called ∑-inseparable iff the ∑-reducts of their models coincide. Then, a ∑-module is defined as a ∑-inseparable subset of the ontology. Unfortunately deciding if a subset of an ontology is a minimal ∑-module, over ontologies formulated in even moderately expressive logics, is of perpetually high complexity and often undecidable, and for this reason approximation algorithms are required. Instead of computing a minimal ∑-module one computes some ∑-module and the main research task is to minimise the size of these modules --- to compute an approximation of a minimal ∑-module. This thesis considers research surrounding approximations based on the model ∑-inseparability relation including: improving and extending existing approximation algorithms, providing a highly-optimised implementations, and the introduction a new methodology to evaluate just how well approximations approximate minimal modules, all supported by a significant empirical investigation