Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

Skip to main content

Approximating Most Specific Concepts in Description Logics with Existential Restrictions

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
KI 2001: Advances in Artificial Intelligence (KI 2001)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 2174))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Computing the most specific concept (msc) is an inference task that allows to abstract from individuals defined in description logic (DL) knowledge bases. For DLs that allow for existential restrictions or number restrictions, however, the msc need not exist unless one allows for cyclic concepts interpreted with the greatest fixed-point semantics. Since such concepts cannot be handled by current DL-systems, we propose to approximate the msc. We show that for the DL ALE, which has concept conjunction, a restricted form of negation, existential restrictions, and value restrictions as constructors, approximations of the msc always exist and can effectively be computed.

This work was carried out while the author was still at the LuFG Theoretische Informatik, RWTH Aachen, Germany.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. S. Abiteboul, R. Hull, and V. Vianu. Foundations of Databases. Addison-Wesley, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  2. F. Baader and R. Küsters. Computing the least common subsumer and the most specific concept in the presence of cyclic ALN-concept descriptions. In Proc. Of KI’98, LNAI 1504, pp 129–140. Springer-Verlag, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  3. F. Baader, R. Küsters, and R. Molitor. Computing least common subsumers in description logics with existential restrictions. In Proc. of IJCAI’99, pp 96–101. Morgan Kaufmann, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  4. F. Baader and R. Molitor. Building and structuring description logic knowledge bases using least common subsumers and concept analysis. In Proc. Of ICCS2000, LNAI 1867,pp 292–305. Springer-Verlag, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  5. W.W. Cohen, A. Borgida, and H. Hirsh. Computing least common subsumers in description logics. In Proc. of AAAI’92, pp 754–760. MITPress, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  6. M. Chein and M. Mugnier. Conceptual graphs: Fundamental notions. Revue d’Intelligence. 6(4):365–406, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  7. W.W. Cohen and H. Hirsh. Learning the classic description logic: Theoretical and experimental results. In Proc. of KR’94, pp 121–132. Morgan Kaufmann, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  8. M.R. Garey and D.S. Johnson. Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness. Freeman, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  9. V. Haarslev and R. Möller. Expressive ABox reasoning with number restrictions, role hierarchies and transitively closed roles. In Proc. of KR2000, pp 273–284. Morgan Kaufmann, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  10. I. Horrocks. Using an expressive description Logic: FaCTor fiction? In Proc. Of KR’98, pp 636–647. Morgan Kaufmann, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  11. R. Küsters. Non-Standard Inference in Description Logics. PhD thesis, RWTH Aachen, 2000. To appear as volume 2100 of the Springer Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence.

    Google Scholar 

  12. R. Küsters and A. Borgida. What’s in an attribute? Consequences for the least common subsumer. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 14: 167–203, 2001.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  13. R. Küsters and R. Molitor. Computing least common subsumers in ALEN. In Proc. of IJCAI’01. Morgan Kaufmann, 2001. To appear.

    Google Scholar 

  14. R. Küsters and R. Molitor.Computing most specific concepts in description logics with existential restrictions. Technical Report LTCS-00-05. See http://wwwlti.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/Forschung/Reports.html.

  15. B. Nebel. Reasoning and Revision in Hybrid Representation Systems. LNAI 422, Springer-Verlag, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  16. A. Schaerf. On the complexity of the instance checking problem in concept languages with existential quantification. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems, 2:265–278, 1993.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. L. von Wedel and W. Marquardt. ROME: A repository to support the integration of models over the lifecycle of model-based engineering processes. In Proc. Of ESCAPE-10, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Küsters, R., Molitor, R. (2001). Approximating Most Specific Concepts in Description Logics with Existential Restrictions. In: Baader, F., Brewka, G., Eiter, T. (eds) KI 2001: Advances in Artificial Intelligence. KI 2001. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 2174. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45422-5_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45422-5_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-42612-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45422-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics