Efficient Axiom Pinpointing with EL2MCS

Arif, M. Fareed; Mencía, Carlos; Marques-Silva, João

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-24489-1_17

Cited by 12 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Proof. We prove conp-hardness through a reduction from the negation of the following np-complete problem [31]: given a monotone Boolean formula ϕ (that is, a propositional formula without negations) and a set V of valuations of the variables in ϕ, decide whether there exists a maximal valuation V of the variables in ϕ that falsifies ϕ and does not contain any valuation in V. 3 Given an instance ϕ, V of this problem, let sub be the set of all subformulas of ϕ, and csub the subset of sub not containing any propositional variable. For each ψ ∈ sub, we create a concept name A ψ , and for every ψ ∈ csub define the TBox…”

Section: Instance Checking Under Abox Repairsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In practical terms, however, a MinA-polynomial algorithm would be more interesting. Indeed, empirical analyses have shown that realistic ontologies typically contain very few MinAs, but a very large number of repairs [2,3,22].…”

Section: Instance Checking Under Abox Repairsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Throughout this section, Rep K denotes the set of all ABox repairs 3. For simplicity, we identify a propositional valuation V with the set of variables that it makes true.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Inconsistency-Tolerant Instance Checking in Tractable Description Logics

Peñaloza

2017

Rules and Reasoning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on inconsistency-tolerant query answering usually assumes that the terminological knowledge is correct, and only the facts (ABox) need to be repaired. In this paper we study the problem of answering instance queries over inconsistent ontologies, by repairing the whole knowledge base (KB). Contrary to ABox repairs, when KB repairs are considered, instance checking in DL-LiteHorn w.r.t. the brave semantics remains tractable, and the intersection semantics allow for an anytime algorithm. We also show that inconsistency-tolerant instance checking w.r.t. ABox repairs is intractable even if only polynomially many ABox repairs exist.

show abstract

Section: Instance Checking Under Abox Repairsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Instance Checking Under Abox Repairsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Inconsistency-Tolerant Instance Checking in Tractable Description Logics

Peñaloza

2017

Rules and Reasoning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Axiom pinpointing refers to the task of finding the precise axioms in an ontology that cause a (potentially unwanted) consequence to follow [25]. Recent years have witnessed remarkable improvements in axiom pinpointing technologies, including for the case of the EL family of DLs [1,2,[5][6][7]20,21,30,31]. Among these, the use of SAT-based methods [1,2,30] was shown to outperform other alternative approaches very significantly.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recent years have witnessed remarkable improvements in axiom pinpointing technologies, including for the case of the EL family of DLs [1,2,[5][6][7]20,21,30,31]. Among these, the use of SAT-based methods [1,2,30] was shown to outperform other alternative approaches very significantly. This is achieved by reducing the problem to a propositional Horn formula, which is then analyzed with a dedicated decision engine for Horn formulae.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

BEACON: An Efficient SAT-Based Tool for Debugging $${\mathcal {EL}}{^+}$$ Ontologies

Arif

Mencía

Ignatiev

et al. 2016

Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing – SAT 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Description Logics (DLs) are knowledge representation and reasoning formalisms used in many settings. Among them, the EL family of DLs stands out due to the availability of polynomial-time inference algorithms and its ability to represent knowledge from domains such as medical informatics. However, the construction of an ontology is an errorprone process which often leads to unintended inferences. This paper presents the BEACON tool for debugging EL + ontologies. BEACON builds on earlier work relating minimal justifications (MinAs) of EL + ontologies and MUSes of a Horn formula, and integrates state-of-the-art algorithms for solving different function problems in the SAT domain.

show abstract

Consequence-Based Axiom Pinpointing

Ozaki

Peñaloza

2018

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Axiom pinpointing refers to the problem of finding the axioms in an ontology that are relevant for understanding a given entailment or consequence. One approach for axiom pinpointing, known as glass-box, is to modify a classical decision procedure for the entailments into a method that computes the solutions for the pinpointing problem. Recently, consequence-based decision procedures have been proposed as a promising alternative for tableaux-based reasoners for standard ontology languages. In this work, we present a general framework to extend consequence-based algorithms with axiom pinpointing.

show abstract

Efficient Axiom Pinpointing with EL2MCS

Cited by 12 publications

References 21 publications

Inconsistency-Tolerant Instance Checking in Tractable Description Logics

Inconsistency-Tolerant Instance Checking in Tractable Description Logics

BEACON: An Efficient SAT-Based Tool for Debugging $${\mathcal {EL}}{^+}$$ Ontologies

Consequence-Based Axiom Pinpointing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About