Combining Linear Logic and Size Types for Implicit Complexity

Several type systems have been proposed to statically control the time complexity of lambda-calculus programs and characterize complexity classes such as FPTIME or FEXPTIME. A first line of research stems from linear logic and restricted versions of its !-modality controlling duplication. A second approach relies on the idea of tracking the size increase between input and output, and together with a restricted recursion scheme, to deduce time complexity bounds. However both approaches suffer from limitations : either a limited intensional expressivity, or linearity restrictions. In the present work we incorporate both approaches into a common type system, in order to overcome their respective constraints. Our system is based on elementary linear logic combined with linear size types, called sEAL, and leads to characterizations of the complexity classes FPTIME and 2k-FEXPTIME, for k >= 0

On the uniform one-dimensional fragment

The uniform one-dimensional fragment of first-order logic, U1, is a recently introduced formalism that extends two-variable logic in a natural way to contexts with relations of all arities. We survey properties of U1 and investigate its relationship to description logics designed to accommodate higher arity relations, with particular attention given to DLR_reg. We also define a description logic version of a variant of U1 and prove a range of new results concerning the expressivity of U1 and related logics

Towards Understanding Reasoning Complexity in Practice

Although the computational complexity of the logic underlying the standard OWL 2 for the Web Ontology Language (OWL) appears discouraging for real applications, several contributions have shown that reasoning with OWL ontologies is feasible in practice. It turns out that reasoning in practice is often far less complex than is suggested by the established theoretical complexity bound, which reflects the worstcase scenario. State-of-the reasoners like FACT++, HERMIT, PELLET and RACER have demonstrated that, even with fairly expressive fragments of OWL 2, acceptable performances can be achieved. However, it is still not well understood why reasoning is feasible in practice and it is rather unclear how to study this problem. In this paper, we suggest first steps that in our opinion could lead to a better understanding of practical complexity. We also provide and discuss some initial empirical results with HERMIT on prominent ontologie

Ontologies on the semantic web

As an informational technology, the World Wide Web has enjoyed spectacular success. In just ten years it has transformed the way information is produced, stored, and shared in arenas as diverse as shopping, family photo albums, and high-level academic research. The “Semantic Web” was touted by its developers as equally revolutionary but has not yet achieved anything like the Web’s exponential uptake. This 17 000 word survey article explores why this might be so, from a perspective that bridges both philosophy and IT

Bisimulation and expressivity for conditional belief, degrees of belief, and safe belief

Plausibility models are Kripke models that agents use to reason about knowledge and belief, both of themselves and of each other. Such models are used to interpret the notions of conditional belief, degrees of belief, and safe belief. The logic of conditional belief contains that modality and also the knowledge modality, and similarly for the logic of degrees of belief and the logic of safe belief. With respect to these logics, plausibility models may contain too much information. A proper notion of bisimulation is required that characterises them. We define that notion of bisimulation and prove the required characterisations: on the class of image-finite and preimage-finite models (with respect to the plausibility relation), two pointed Kripke models are modally equivalent in either of the three logics, if and only if they are bisimilar. As a result, the information content of such a model can be similarly expressed in the logic of conditional belief, or the logic of degrees of belief, or that of safe belief. This, we found a surprising result. Still, that does not mean that the logics are equally expressive: the logics of conditional and degrees of belief are incomparable, the logics of degrees of belief and safe belief are incomparable, while the logic of safe belief is more expressive than the logic of conditional belief. In view of the result on bisimulation characterisation, this is an equally surprising result. We hope our insights may contribute to the growing community of formal epistemology and on the relation between qualitative and quantitative modelling

Dynamic Change Evaluation for Ontology Evolution in the Semantic Web

Changes in an ontology may have a disruptive impact on any system using it. This impact may depend on structural changes such as introduction or removal of concept definitions, or it may be related to a change in the expected performance of the reasoning tasks. As the number of systems using ontologies is expected to increase, and given the open nature of the Semantic Web, introduction of new ontologies and modifications to existing ones are to be expected. Dynamically handling such changes, without requiring human intervention, becomes crucial. This paper presents a framework that isolates groups of related axioms in an OWL ontology, so that a change in one or more axioms can be automatically localised to a part of the ontology