On the Computation of Common Subsumers in Description Logics

Description logics (DL) knowledge bases are often build by users with expertise in the application domain, but little expertise in logic. To support this kind of users when building their knowledge bases a number of extension methods have been proposed to provide the user with concept descriptions as a starting point for new concept definitions. The inference service central to several of these approaches is the computation of (least) common subsumers of concept descriptions. In case disjunction of concepts can be expressed in the DL under consideration, the least common subsumer (lcs) is just the disjunction of the input concepts. Such a trivial lcs is of little use as a starting point for a new concept definition to be edited by the user. To address this problem we propose two approaches to obtain "meaningful" common subsumers in the presence of disjunction tailored to two different methods to extend DL knowledge bases. More precisely, we devise computation methods for the approximation-based approach and the customization of DL knowledge bases, extend these methods to DLs with number restrictions and discuss their efficient implementation

Dresdner Universitätsjournal

"Dresdner Universitätsjournal" vom 25. November 200

Formal Concept Analysis Methods for Description Logics

This work presents mainly two contributions to Description Logics (DLs) research by means of Formal Concept Analysis (FCA) methods: supporting bottom-up construction of DL knowledge bases, and completing DL knowledge bases. Its contribution to FCA research is on the computational complexity of computing generators of closed sets

A Lightweight Defeasible Description Logic in Depth: Quantification in Rational Reasoning and Beyond

Description Logics (DLs) are increasingly successful knowledge representation formalisms, useful for any application requiring implicit derivation of knowledge from explicitly known facts. A prominent example domain benefiting from these formalisms since the 1990s is the biomedical field. This area contributes an intangible amount of facts and relations between low- and high-level concepts such as the constitution of cells or interactions between studied illnesses, their symptoms and remedies. DLs are well-suited for handling large formal knowledge repositories and computing inferable coherences throughout such data, relying on their well-founded first-order semantics. In particular, DLs of reduced expressivity have proven a tremendous worth for handling large ontologies due to their computational tractability. In spite of these assets and prevailing influence, classical DLs are not well-suited to adequately model some of the most intuitive forms of reasoning. The capability for abductive reasoning is imperative for any field subjected to incomplete knowledge and the motivation to complete it with typical expectations. When such default expectations receive contradicting evidence, an abductive formalism is able to retract previously drawn, conflicting conclusions. Common examples often include human reasoning or a default characterisation of properties in biology, such as the normal arrangement of organs in the human body. Treatment of such defeasible knowledge must be aware of exceptional cases - such as a human suffering from the congenital condition situs inversus - and therefore accommodate for the ability to retract defeasible conclusions in a non-monotonic fashion. Specifically tailored non-monotonic semantics have been continuously investigated for DLs in the past 30 years. A particularly promising approach, is rooted in the research by Kraus, Lehmann and Magidor for preferential (propositional) logics and Rational Closure (RC). The biggest advantages of RC are its well-behaviour in terms of formal inference postulates and the efficient computation of defeasible entailments, by relying on a tractable reduction to classical reasoning in the underlying formalism. A major contribution of this work is a reorganisation of the core of this reasoning method, into an abstract framework formalisation. This framework is then easily instantiated to provide the reduction method for RC in DLs as well as more advanced closure operators, such as Relevant or Lexicographic Closure. In spite of their practical aptitude, we discovered that all reduction approaches fail to provide any defeasible conclusions for elements that only occur in the relational neighbourhood of the inspected elements. More explicitly, a distinguishing advantage of DLs over propositional logic is the capability to model binary relations and describe aspects of a related concept in terms of existential and universal quantification. Previous approaches to RC (and more advanced closures) are not able to derive typical behaviour for the concepts that occur within such quantification. The main contribution of this work is to introduce stronger semantics for the lightweight DL EL_bot with the capability to infer the expected entailments, while maintaining a close relation to the reduction method. We achieve this by introducing a new kind of first-order interpretation that allocates defeasible information on its elements directly. This allows to compare the level of typicality of such interpretations in terms of defeasible information satisfied at elements in the relational neighbourhood. A typicality preference relation then provides the means to single out those sets of models with maximal typicality. Based on this notion, we introduce two types of nested rational semantics, a sceptical and a selective variant, each capable of deriving the missing entailments under RC for arbitrarily nested quantified concepts. As a proof of versatility for our new semantics, we also show that the stronger Relevant Closure, can be imbued with typical information in the successors of binary relations. An extensive investigation into the computational complexity of our new semantics shows that the sceptical nested variant comes at considerable additional effort, while the selective semantics reside in the complexity of classical reasoning in the underlying DL, which remains tractable in our case

Learning Terminological Knowledge with High Confidence from Erroneous Data

Description logics knowledge bases are a popular approach to represent terminological and assertional knowledge suitable for computers to work with. Despite that, the practicality of description logics is impaired by the difficulties one has to overcome to construct such knowledge bases. Previous work has addressed this issue by providing methods to learn valid terminological knowledge from data, making use of ideas from formal concept analysis. A basic assumption here is that the data is free of errors, an assumption that can in general not be made for practical applications. This thesis presents extensions of these results that allow to handle errors in the data. For this, knowledge that is "almost valid" in the data is retrieved, where the notion of "almost valid" is formalized using the notion of confidence from data mining. This thesis presents two algorithms which achieve this retrieval. The first algorithm just extracts all almost valid knowledge from the data, while the second algorithm utilizes expert interaction to distinguish errors from rare but valid counterexamples

Learning Description Logic Knowledge Bases from Data Using Methods from Formal Concept Analysis

Description Logics (DLs) are a class of knowledge representation formalisms that can represent terminological and assertional knowledge using a well-defined semantics. Often, knowledge engineers are experts in their own fields, but not in logics, and require assistance in the process of ontology design. This thesis presents three methods that can extract terminological knowledge from existing data and thereby assist in the design process. They are based on similar formalisms from Formal Concept Analysis (FCA), in particular the Next-Closure Algorithm and Attribute-Exploration. The first of the three methods computes terminological knowledge from the data, without any expert interaction. The two other methods use expert interaction where a human expert can confirm each terminological axiom or refute it by providing a counterexample. These two methods differ only in the way counterexamples are provided

Polynomial-Time Reasoning Support for Design and Maintenance of Large-Scale Biomedical Ontologies

Description Logics (DLs) belong to a successful family of knowledge representation formalisms with two key assets: formally well-defined semantics which allows to represent knowledge in an unambiguous way and automated reasoning which allows to infer implicit knowledge from the one given explicitly. This thesis investigates various reasoning techniques for tractable DLs in the EL family which have been implemented in the CEL system. It suggests that the use of the lightweight DLs, in which reasoning is tractable, is beneficial for ontology design and maintenance both in terms of expressivity and scalability. The claim is supported by a case study on the renown medical ontology SNOMED CT and extensive empirical evaluation on several large-scale biomedical ontologies

On the Computation of Common Subsumers in Description Logics

Description logics (DL) knowledge bases are often build by users with expertise in the application domain, but little expertise in logic. To support this kind of users when building their knowledge bases a number of extension methods have been proposed to provide the user with concept descriptions as a starting point for new concept definitions. The inference service central to several of these approaches is the computation of (least) common subsumers of concept descriptions. In case disjunction of concepts can be expressed in the DL under consideration, the least common subsumer (lcs) is just the disjunction of the input concepts. Such a trivial lcs is of little use as a starting point for a new concept definition to be edited by the user. To address this problem we propose two approaches to obtain "meaningful" common subsumers in the presence of disjunction tailored to two different methods to extend DL knowledge bases. More precisely, we devise computation methods for the approximation-based approach and the customization of DL knowledge bases, extend these methods to DLs with number restrictions and discuss their efficient implementation

On the Computation of Common Subsumers in Description Logics

Description logics (DL) knowledge bases are often build by users with expertise in the application domain, but little expertise in logic. To support this kind of users when building their knowledge bases a number of extension methods have been proposed to provide the user with concept descriptions as a starting point for new concept definitions. The inference service central to several of these approaches is the computation of (least) common subsumers of concept descriptions. In case disjunction of concepts can be expressed in the DL under consideration, the least common subsumer (lcs) is just the disjunction of the input concepts. Such a trivial lcs is of little use as a starting point for a new concept definition to be edited by the user. To address this problem we propose two approaches to obtain "meaningful" common subsumers in the presence of disjunction tailored to two different methods to extend DL knowledge bases. More precisely, we devise computation methods for the approximation-based approach and the customization of DL knowledge bases, extend these methods to DLs with number restrictions and discuss their efficient implementation