Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Computing Minimal Projection Modules for \(\mathcal{ELH}^{r}\)-Terminologies

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Logics in Artificial Intelligence (JELIA 2019)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 11468))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

For the development of large-scale representations of knowledge, the application of methodologies and design principles becomes relevant. The knowledge may be organized in ontologies in a modular and hierarchical fashion. An upper-level (reference) ontology typically provides specifications of requirements, functions, design or standards that are to be complied with by domain ontologies for a specific task on a lower level (task ontology) in the hierarchy. Verifying whether and how specifications have been implemented by a task ontology becomes a challenge when relevant axioms of the domain ontology need to be inspected. We consider specifications to be defined using entailments of certain queries over a given vocabulary. For selecting the relevant axioms from task ontologies, we propose a novel module notion called projection module that entails the queries that follow from a reference ontology. We develop algorithms for computing minimal projection modules of Description Logic terminologies for subsumption, instance and conjunctive queries.

This work is partially funded by the ANR project GoAsQ (ANR-15-CE23-0022).

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
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

References

  1. Alsubait, T., Parsia, B., Sattler, U.: Measuring similarity in ontologies: a new family of measures. In: Janowicz, K., Schlobach, S., Lambrix, P., Hyvönen, E. (eds.) EKAW 2014. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 8876, pp. 13–25. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13704-9_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Arif, M.F., Mencía, C., Ignatiev, A., Manthey, N., Peñaloza, R., Marques-Silva, J.: BEACON: an efficient SAT-based tool for debugging \({\cal{EL}}{^+}\) ontologies. In: Creignou, N., Le Berre, D. (eds.) SAT 2016. LNCS, vol. 9710, pp. 521–530. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40970-2_32

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Baader, F., Calvanese, D., McGuinness, D.L., Nardi, D., Patel-Schneider, P.F. (eds.): The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and Applications, 2 edn. Cambridge University Press, June 2010

    Google Scholar 

  4. Baader, F., Horrocks, I., Lutz, C., Sattler, U.: An Introduction to Description Logic. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2017)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  5. Baader, F., Peñaloza, R., Suntisrivaraporn, B.: Pinpointing in the description logic \(\cal{EL}\). In: Proceedings of DL 2007: The 20th International Workshop on Description Logics (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Botoeva, E., Konev, B., Lutz, C., Ryzhikov, V., Wolter, F., Zakharyaschev, M.: Inseparability and conservative extensions of description logic ontologies: a survey. In: Pan, J.Z., et al. (eds.) Reasoning Web 2016. LNCS, vol. 9885, pp. 27–89. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49493-7_2

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Botoeva, E., Kontchakov, R., Ryzhikov, V., Wolter, F., Zakharyaschev, M.: Games for query inseparability of description logic knowledge bases. Artif. Intell. 234, 78–119 (2016)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Botoeva, E., Lutz, C., Ryzhikov, V., Wolter, F., Zakharyaschev, M.: Query-based entailment and inseparability for ALC ontologies. In: Proceedings of IJCAI 2016: The 25th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 1001–1007. AAAI Press (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Chen, J., Ludwig, M., Ma, Y., Walther, D.: Zooming in on ontologies: minimal modules and best excerpts. In: d’Amato, C., et al. (eds.) ISWC 2017. LNCS, vol. 10587, pp. 173–189. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68288-4_11

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Chen, J., Ludwig, M., Walther, D.: Computing minimal subsumption modules of ontologies. In: Proceedings of GCAI 2018: The 4th Global Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 41–53 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Domingue, J., Anutariya, C. (eds.): ASWC 2008. LNCS, vol. 5367. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-89704-0

    Book  Google Scholar 

  12. Ecke, A., Ludwig, M., Walther, D.: The concept difference for \(\cal{EL}\)-terminologies using hypergraphs. In: Proceedings of DChanges 2013: The International workshop on (Document) Changes: Modeling, Detection, Storage and Visualization (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Euzenat, J., Shvaiko, P.: Ontology Matching, 2nd edn. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-38721-0

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Grau, B.C., Horrocks, I., Kazakov, Y., Sattler, U.: Modular reuse of ontologies: theory and practice. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 31(1), 273–318 (2008)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. Jung, J.C., Lutz, C., Martel, M., Schneider, T.: Query conservative extensions in horn description logics with inverse roles. In: Proceedings of IJCAI 2017: The 26th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 1116–1122. AAAI Press (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kalyanpur, A., Parsia, B., Sirin, E., Hendler, J.A.: Debugging unsatisfiable classes in OWL ontologies. J. Web Semant. 3(4), 268–293 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kazakov, Y., Skocovsky, P.: Enumerating justifications using resolution. In: Proceedings of DL 2017: The 30th International Workshop on Description Logics (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Konev, B., Kontchakov, R., Ludwig, M., Schneider, T., Wolter, F., Zakharyaschev, M.: Conjunctive query inseparability of OWL 2 QL TBoxes. In: Proceedings of AAAI 2011: The 25th Conference on Artificial Intelligence. AAAI Press (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Konev, B., Ludwig, M., Walther, D., Wolter, F.: The logical difference for the lightweight description logic EL. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 44, 633–708 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Konev, B., Lutz, C., Walther, D., Wolter, F.: Semantic modularity and module extraction in description logics. In: Proceedings of ECAI 2008: The 18th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 55–59. IOS Press (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Konev, B., Lutz, C., Walther, D., Wolter, F.: Formal properties of modularisation. In: Stuckenschmidt, H., Parent, C., Spaccapietra, S. (eds.) Modular Ontologies. LNCS, vol. 5445, pp. 25–66. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-01907-4_3

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Konev, B., Lutz, C., Walther, D., Wolter, F.: Model-theoretic inseparability and modularity of description logic ontologies. Artif. Intell. 203, 66–103 (2013)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. Konev, B., Walther, D., Wolter, F.: The logical difference problem for description logic terminologies. In: Armando, A., Baumgartner, P., Dowek, G. (eds.) IJCAR 2008. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5195, pp. 259–274. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-71070-7_21

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  24. Kontchakov, R., Wolter, F., Zakharyaschev, M.: Logic-based ontology comparison and module extraction, with an application to DL-Lite. Artif. Intell. 174(15), 1093–1141 (2010)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  25. Lehmann, K., Turhan, A.-Y.: A framework for semantic-based similarity measures for \(\cal{ELH}\)-concepts. In: del Cerro, L.F., Herzig, A., Mengin, J. (eds.) JELIA 2012. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 7519, pp. 307–319. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33353-8_24

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  26. Ludwig, M., Walther, D.: The logical difference for \(\cal{ELH}^{r}\)-terminologies using hypergraphs. In: Proceedings of ECAI 2014: The 21st European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 555–560 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Romero, A.A., Kaminski, M., Grau, B.C., Horrocks, I.: Module extraction in expressive ontology languages via datalog reasoning. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 55, 499–564 (2016)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  28. Sattler, U., Schneider, T., Zakharyaschev, M.: Which kind of module should I extract? In: Proceedings of DL 2009. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 477. CEUR-WS.org (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Zhou, Z., Qi, G., Suntisrivaraporn, B.: A new method of finding all justifications in OWL 2 EL. In: Proceedings of WI 2013: IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conferences on Web Intelligence, pp. 213–220 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratoire de Recherche en Informatique, Université Paris-Saclay, Paris, France

    Jieying Chen & Yue Ma

  2. Beaufort, Luxembourg

    Michel Ludwig

  3. Fraunhofer IVI, Dresden, Germany

    Dirk Walther

Authors
  1. Jieying Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michel Ludwig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yue Ma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Dirk Walther
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jieying Chen .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Calabria, Rende, Italy

    Francesco Calimeri

  2. University of Calabria, Rende, Italy

    Nicola Leone

  3. Mathematics and Computer Science, University of Calabria, Rende, Italy

    Marco Manna

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Chen, J., Ludwig, M., Ma, Y., Walther, D. (2019). Computing Minimal Projection Modules for \(\mathcal{ELH}^{r}\)-Terminologies. In: Calimeri, F., Leone, N., Manna, M. (eds) Logics in Artificial Intelligence. JELIA 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11468. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19570-0_23

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19570-0_23

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-19569-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-19570-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation