Some Classical Problems of Inheritance Networks in the Light of Defeasible Ontology Reasoning

Reasoning with possibly inconsistent ontologies is an important reasearch topic for the implementation of the Semantic Web as they pose a problem for performing instance checking. We contend that Defeasible Logic Programming (DeLP) is a reliable tool for doing ontology reasoning when Description Logic ontologies can be interpreted as DeLP programs. In this work we present some classical problems of the eld of inheritance networks and show how they are modeled as inconsistent ontologies and thus how the problem of instance checking is solved; we also show how issues in reasoning with argumentation frameworks based on Dung's grounded semantics are also solved when applied to ontology reasoning, and we revise the main algorithm for instance checking when using DeLP with inconsistent ontologies.Eje: XV Workshop de Agentes y Sistemas InteligentesRed de Universidades con Carreras de Informática (RedUNCI

Some Classical Problems of Inheritance Networks in the Light of Defeasible Ontology Reasoning

Reasoning with possibly inconsistent ontologies is an important reasearch topic for the implementation of the Semantic Web as they pose a problem for performing instance checking. We contend that Defeasible Logic Programming (DeLP) is a reliable tool for doing ontology reasoning when Description Logic ontologies can be interpreted as DeLP programs. In this work we present some classical problems of the eld of inheritance networks and show how they are modeled as inconsistent ontologies and thus how the problem of instance checking is solved; we also show how issues in reasoning with argumentation frameworks based on Dung's grounded semantics are also solved when applied to ontology reasoning, and we revise the main algorithm for instance checking when using DeLP with inconsistent ontologies.Eje: XV Workshop de Agentes y Sistemas InteligentesRed de Universidades con Carreras de Informática (RedUNCI

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

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

Integration of rules and ontologies with defeasible logic programming

The Semantic Web is a vision of the current Web where resources have exact meaning assigned in terms of ontologies, thus enabling agents to reason about them. As inconsistencies cannot be treated by standard reasoning approaches, we use Defeasible Logic Programming (DeLP) to reason with possibly inconsistent ontologies. In this article we show how to integrate rules and ontologies in the Semantic Web. We show how to use a possibly inconsistent set of rules represented by a DeLP program to reason on top of a set of (possibly inconsistent) ontologies.Presentado en el X Workshop Agentes y Sistemas InteligentesRed de Universidades con Carreras en Informática (RedUNCI

Some Classical Problems of Inheritance Networks in the Light of Defeasible Ontology Reasoning

Reasoning with possibly inconsistent ontologies is an important reasearch topic for the implementation of the Semantic Web as they pose a problem for performing instance checking. We contend that Defeasible Logic Programming (DeLP) is a reliable tool for doing ontology reasoning when Description Logic ontologies can be interpreted as DeLP programs. In this work we present some classical problems of the eld of inheritance networks and show how they are modeled as inconsistent ontologies and thus how the problem of instance checking is solved; we also show how issues in reasoning with argumentation frameworks based on Dung's grounded semantics are also solved when applied to ontology reasoning, and we revise the main algorithm for instance checking when using DeLP with inconsistent ontologies.Eje: XV Workshop de Agentes y Sistemas InteligentesRed de Universidades con Carreras de Informática (RedUNCI

On the Application of Argument Accrual to Reasoning with Inconsistent Possibilistic Ontologies

We present an approach for performing instance checking in a suitable subset of possibilistic description logic programming ontologies by using argument accrual. Ontologies are interpreted in possibilistic logic programming under Dung's grounded semantics. We present a reasoning framework with a case study and a Java-based implementation for enacting the proposed approach.XVII Workshop Agentes y Sistemas Inteligentes (WASI).Red de Universidades con Carreras en Informática (RedUNCI

On the Application of Argument Accrual to Reasoning with Inconsistent Possibilistic Ontologies

We present an approach for performing instance checking in a suitable subset of possibilistic description logic programming ontologies by using argument accrual. Ontologies are interpreted in possibilistic logic programming under Dung's grounded semantics. We present a reasoning framework with a case study and a Java-based implementation for enacting the proposed approach.XVII Workshop Agentes y Sistemas Inteligentes (WASI).Red de Universidades con Carreras en Informática (RedUNCI

Reasoning with Inconsistent Possibilistic Ontologies by Applying Argument Accrual

We present an approach for performing instance checking in possibilistic description logic programming ontologies by accruing arguments that support the membership of individuals to concepts. Ontologies are interpreted as possibilistic logic programs where accruals of arguments as regarded as vertexes in an abstract argumentation framework. A suitable attack relation between accruals is defined. We present a reasoning framework with a case study and a Java-based implementation for enacting the proposed approach that is capable of reasoning under Dung’s grounded semantics.Facultad de Informátic