Untitled

Tammet, Tanel

doi:10.1023/a:1005887414560

Cited by 59 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In recent years, a number of highly efficient FO provers have been implemented [32,50,43]. These provers compete annually on a set of tasks, and the results are published [9].…”

Section: A Prototype Swrl Reasonermentioning

confidence: 99%

OWL rules: A proposal and prototype implementation

Horrocks

Patel‐Schneider

Bechhofer

et al. 2005

Journal of Web Semantics

254

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although the OWL Web Ontology Language adds considerable expressive power to the Semantic Web it does have expressive limitations, particularly with respect to what can be said about properties. We present SWRL (the Semantic Web Rules Language), a Horn clause rules extension to OWL that overcomes many of these limitations. SWRL extends OWL in a syntactically and semantically coherent manner: the basic syntax for SWRL rules is an extension of the abstract syntax for OWL DL and OWL Lite; SWRL rules are given formal meaning via an extension of the OWL DL model-theoretic semantics; SWRL rules are given an XML syntax based on the OWL XML presentation syntax; and a mapping from SWRL rules to RDF graphs is given based on the OWL RDF/XML exchange syntax. We discuss the expressive power of SWRL, showing that the ontology consistency problem is undecidable, provide several examples of SWRL usage, and discuss a prototype implementation of reasoning support for SWRL.

show abstract

“…In recent years, a number of highly efficient FO provers have been implemented [32,50,43]. These provers compete annually on a set of tasks, and the results are published [9].…”

Section: A Prototype Swrl Reasonermentioning

confidence: 99%

OWL rules: A proposal and prototype implementation

Horrocks

Patel‐Schneider

Bechhofer

et al. 2005

Journal of Web Semantics

254

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Answer predicates are implemented in a number of theorem provers, including Vampire, Otter [28] and Gandalf [43]. For Vampire, one can also specify that only definite answers should be considered.…”

Section: Adapting Vampire For Large Ontologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reasoning Support for Expressive Ontology Languages Using a Theorem Prover

Horrocks

Воронков

2006

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. It is claimed in [45] that first-order theorem provers are not efficient for reasoning with ontologies based on description logics compared to specialised description logic reasoners. However, the development of more expressive ontology languages requires the use of theorem provers able to reason with full first-order logic and even its extensions. So far, theorem provers have extensively been used for running experiments over TPTP containing mainly problems with relatively small axiomatisations. A question arises whether such theorem provers can be used to reason in real time with large axiomatisations used in expressive ontologies such as SUMO. In this paper we answer this question affirmatively by showing that a carefully engineered theorem prover can answer queries to ontologies having over 15,000 first-order axioms with equality. Ontologies used in our experiments are based on the language KIF, whose expressive power goes far beyond the description logic based languages currently used in the Semantic Web.State-of-the-art theorem provers for first-order logic (FOL) are highly sophisticated and efficient programs. Moreover, they are very flexible tools and can be tuned to a number of applications. For example, Vampire [35] provides a large collection of parameters that can be used to give better performance for various classes of applications. In addition, Vampire implements a number of literal selection functions and internally contains a library for defining such functions in a simple way; this makes it possible to simulate various proof-search algorithms and even provide decision procedures for decidable classes of first-order logic (see, e.g., [23]).However, there was a common belief that provers like Vampire cannot directly be used for efficient reasoning with very large ontologies using expressive languages such as KIF [14] for two reasons. Firstly, these provers are optimised for reasoning with relatively small axiomatisations. Secondly, they do not support some extensions of FOL required in KIF.In this paper we describe an adaptation of Vampire to support reasoning for expressive ontology languages and present experimental results which show that it can be used for efficient reasoning with large ontologies using extensions of the first-order language.The authors are partially supported by grants from EPSRC. This paper is structured as follows. In Section 1 we briefly overview expressive languages for ontologies, including the language KIF, and FO provers. In Section 2 we describe the adaptation of Vampire for reasoning with large ontologies. For our experiments we selected ontologies implemented in KIF since they offer a high degree of sophistication compared to ontologies using Description Logic (DL) based languages, and there are publicly available KIF-based ontologies containing thousands of FO formulas with equality. However, our adaptation is quite general, and could be used for other expressive ontology languages.Note that there is no way to compare Vampire with description logic prove...

show abstract

“…In recent years, a number of highly efficient FO provers have been implemented [23,33,29]. These provers compete annually on a set of tasks, and the results are published [7].…”

Section: Preliminariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using Vampire to Reason with OWL

Tsarkov

Riazanov

Bechhofer

et al. 2004

The Semantic Web – ISWC 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. OWL DL corresponds to a Description Logic (DL) that is a fragment of classical first-order predicate logic (FOL). Therefore, the standard methods of automated reasoning for full FOL can potentially be used instead of dedicated DL reasoners to solve OWL DL reasoning tasks. In this paper we report on some experiments designed to explore the feasibility of using existing general-purpose FOL provers to reason with OWL DL. We also extend our approach to SWRL, a proposed rule language extension to OWL.

show abstract

Untitled

Cited by 59 publications

References 0 publications

OWL rules: A proposal and prototype implementation

OWL rules: A proposal and prototype implementation

Reasoning Support for Expressive Ontology Languages Using a Theorem Prover

Using Vampire to Reason with OWL

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About