2006 DL+logTightIntegofDescrLogicsandDisjunctiveDatalog

From GM-RKB
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Subject Headings:

Notes

Cited By

Quotes

Abstract

The integration of Description Logics and Datalog rules presents many semantic and computational problems. In particular, reasoning in a system fully integrating Description Logics knowledge bases (DL-KBs) and Datalog programs is undecidable. Many proposals have overcomed this problem through a “safeness ” condition that limits the interaction between the DL-KB and the Datalog rules. Such a safe integration of Description Logics and Datalog provides for systems with decidable reasoning, at the price of a strong limitation in terms of expressive power. In this paper we define DL+log, a general framework for the integration of Description Logics and disjunctive Datalog. From the knowledge representation viewpoint, DL+log extends previous proposals, since it allows for a tighter form of integration between DL-KBs and Datalog rules which overcomes the main representational limits of the approaches based on the safeness condition. From the reasoning viewpoint, we present algorithms for reasoning in DL+log, and prove decidability and complexity of reasoning in DL+log for several Description Logics. To the best of our knowledge, DL+log constitutes the most powerful decidable combination of Description Logics and disjunctive Datalog rules proposed so far.

References

  • Baader, F.; Calvanese, D.; McGuinness, D.; Nardi, D., and Patel-Schneider, P. F., eds. 2003. The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation and Applications. Cambridge University Press.
  • Calvanese, D., and Rosati, R. 2003. Answering recursive queries under keys and foreign keys is undecidable. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Workshop on Knowledge Representation meets Databases (KRDB 2003). CEUR Electronic Workshop Proceedings, http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-79/.
  • Calvanese, D.; De Giacomo, G.; Lenzerini, M.; Nardi, D., and Rosati, R. 1998. Description logic framework for information integration. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR’98), 2–13.
  • Calvanese, D.; De Giacomo, G.; Lembo, D.; Lenzerini, M., and Rosati, R. 2005. DL-Lite: Tractable description logics for ontologies. In: Proceedings of the 20th Nat. Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2005), 602–607.
  • Calvanese, D.; De Giacomo, G., and Lenzerini, M. 1998. On the decidability of query containment under constraints. In: Proceedings of the 17th ACM SIGACT SIGMOD SIGART Symp. on Principles of Database Systems (PODS’98), 149–158.
  • Donini, F. M.; Lenzerini, M.; Nardi, D., and Schaerf, A. 1998. AL-log: Integrating Datalog and description logics. J. of Intelligent Information Systems 10(3):227–252.
  • Eiter, T.; Lukasiewicz, T.; Schindlauer, R., and Tompits, H. 2004a. Combining answer set programming with description logics for the semantic web. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 2004), 141–151.
  • Eiter, T.; Lukasiewicz, T.; Schindlauer, R., and Tompits, H. 2004b. Well-founded semantics for description logic programs in the semantic web. In: Proceedings of the Third International Workshop on Rules and Rule Markup Languages for the Semantic Web (RuleML 2004), 81–97.
  • Eiter, T.; Gottlob, G., and Mannilla, H. 1997. Disjunctive Datalog. ACM Trans. on Database Systems 22(3):364–418.
  • Gelfond, M., and Lifschitz, V. 1991. Classical negation in logic programs and disjunctive databases. New Generation Computing 9:365–385.
  • Grosof, B. N.; Horrocks, I.; Volz, R., and Decker, S. 2003. Description logic programs: Combining logic programs with description logic. In: Proceedings of the 12th International World Wide Web Conference (WWW 2003), 48–57.
  • Horrocks, I., and Patel-Schneider, P. F. 2004. A proposal for an OWL rules language. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW 2004), 723–731.
  • Levy, A. Y., and Rousset, M.-C. 1996a. CARIN: A representation language combining Horn rules and description logics. In: Proceedings of the 12th Eur. Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI’96), 323–327.
  • Levy, A. Y., and Rousset, M.-C. 1996b. The limits on combining recursive Horn rules with description logics. In: Proceedings of the 13th Nat. Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI’96), 577–584.
  • Levy, A. Y., and Rousset, M.-C. 1998. Combining Horn rules and description logics in CARIN. Artificial Intelligence 104(1–2):165–209.
  • Motik, B.; Sattler, U., and Studer, R. 2004. Query answering for OWL-DL with rules. In: Proceedings of the 2004 International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2004), 549–563.
  • Motik, B.; Sattler, U., and Studer, R. 2005. Query answering for OWL-DL with rules. Web Semantics 3(1):41–60.
  • Ortiz de la Fuente, M. M.; Calvanese, D.; Eiter, T., and Franconi, E. 2005. Data complexity of answering conjunctive queries over SHIQ knowledge bases. Technical report, Faculty of Computer Science, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano. Also available as CORR technical report at http://arxiv.org/abs/cs.LO/0507059/.
  • Rosati, R. 1999. Towards expressive KR systems integrating Datalog and description logics: Preliminary report. In: Proceedings of the 1999 Description Logic Workshop (DL’99), 160–164. CEUR Electronic Workshop Proceedings, http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-22/.
  • Rosati, R. 2005a. On the decidability and complexity of integrating ontologies and rules. Web Semantics 3(1):61–73.
  • Rosati, R. 2005b. Semantic and computational advantages of the safe integration of ontologies and rules. In: Proceedings of the 2005 International Workshop on Principles and Practice of Semantic Web Reasoning (PPSWR 2005), volume 3703 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 50–64. Springer.

,

 AuthorvolumeDate ValuetitletypejournaltitleUrldoinoteyear
2006 DL+logTightIntegofDescrLogicsandDisjunctiveDatalogRiccardo RosatiDL+log: Tight Integration of Description Logics and Disjunctive Dataloghttp://www.dis.uniroma1.it/~rosati/publications/Rosati-KR-06.pdf