A revision-based approach to handling inconsistency in description logics

Artificial Intelligence Review

Volumn 26, Issue 1-2, 2006, Pages 115-128

  Qi, Guilin ^a   Liu, Weiru ^b   Bell, David ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KARLSRUHE   (Germany)

^b QUEEN'S UNIVERSITY BELFAST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Description logics; Inconsistency handling; Knowledge representation; Semantic web; Stratification

Indexed keywords

CLASSICAL LOGIC; DESCRIPTION LOGIC; INCONSISTENCY HANDLING; INCONSISTENCY MANAGEMENT; KNOWLEDGE BASE; PROBLEM-BASED; REVISION OPERATOR;

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; KNOWLEDGE BASED SYSTEMS; KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION; MATHEMATICAL OPERATORS; REFINING; SEMANTIC WEB; SEMANTICS;

DATA DESCRIPTION;

EID: 44649128064     PISSN: 02692821     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10462-007-9044-3     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (29)

1. Baader F, Hollunder B (1995a) Embedding defaults into terminological knowledge representation formalisms. J Autom Reason 14(1):149-180
2. Baader F, Hollunder B (1995b) Priorities on defaults with prerequisites, and their application in treating specificity in terminological default logic. J Autom Reason 15(1):41-68
3. Baader F, Buchheit M, Hollunder B (1996) Cardinality restrictions on concepts. Artif Intell 88:195-213
4. Baader F, Calvanese D,McGuinness DL, Nardi D, Patel-Schneider PF (2003) The description logic handbook: theory, implementation and application. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
5. Benferhat S, Baida RE (2004) A stratified first order logic approach for access control. Int J Intell Syst 19:817-836
6. Benferhat S, Kaci S, Berre DL,WilliamsM-A (2004)Weakening conflicting information for iterated revision and knowledge integration. Artif Intell 153(1-2):339-371
7. Berners-Lee T, Hendler J, Lassila O (2001) The semantic web. Sci Am 284(5):3443
8. Borgida A (1994) On the relationship between description logic and predicate logic. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on information and knowledge management (CIKM'94), Gaithersburg, Maryland pp 219-225
9. Flouris G, Plexousakis D, Antoniou G (2005) On applying the AGM theory to DLs and OWL. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on semantic web (ISWC'05), pp 216-231
10. Friedrich G, Shchekotykhin KM(2005) A general diagnosis method for ontologies. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on semantic web (ISWC'05), Galway, Ireland pp 232-246
11. Gärdenfors P (1988) Knowledge in flux-modeling the dynamic of epistemic states. MIT, Cambridge, Mass
12. Haarslev V, Möller R (2001) RACER system description. In: Proceedings of the 1st international joint conference on automated reasoning (IJCAR'01), Siena, Italy pp 701-706
13. Haase P, van Harmelen F, Huang Z, Stuckenschmidt H, Sure Y (2005) A framework for handling inconsistency in changing ontologies. In: Proceedings of the 4th international semantic web conference (ISWC'05). LNCA3729, Galway, Ireland pp 353-367
14. Haase P, Völker J (2005) Ontology learning and reasoning-dealing with uncertainty and inconsistency. In: Proceedings of the international workshop on uncertainty reasoning for the semanticWeb, Galway, Ireland pp 45-55
15. Horrocks I (1998) The FaCT system. In: de Swart H (ed) Proceeding of the Tableaux'98, LNAI 1397, Oisterwijk, The Netherlands pp 307-312
16. Horrocks I, Sattler U (2001) Ontology reasoning in the SHOQ(D) description logic. In: Proceedings of the 17th international joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI'01), Seattle, Washington, USA pp 199-204
17. Huang Z, van Harmelen F, ten Teije A (2005) Reasoning with inconsistent ontologies. In: Proceedings of the 19th international joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI'05), Edinburgh, Scotland, UK pp 254-259
18. Ma Y, Qi G, Hitzler P, Lin Z (2007) Measuring inconsistency for description logics based on paraconsistent semantics. In: Proceeding of the European conference on symbolic and quantitative approaches to reasoning with uncertainty (ECSQARU'07) Hammamet, Tunisia pp 30-41
19. Meyer T, Lee K, Booth R (2005) Knowledge integration for description logics. In: Proceedings of the 20th national conference on artificial intelligence (AAAI'05), Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA pp 645-650
20. Minsky M (1981) A framework for representing knowledge. In: Haugeland J (ed) Mind design. MIT, Cambridge
21. Parsia B, Sirin E, Kalyanpur A (2005) Debugging OWL ontologies. In: Proceedings of the 14th international World Wide Web conference (WWW'05), Chiba, Japan pp 633-640
22. Qi G, Liu W, Bell DA (2005) A revision-based approach to resolving conflicting information. In: Proceedings of the 21st conference on uncertainty in artificial intelligence (UAI'05), Edinburgh, Scotland, UK pp 477-484
23. Quantz J, Royer V (1992) A preference semantics for defaults in terminological logics. In: Proceedings of the 3rd conference on principles of knowledge representation and reasoning (KR'92), Cambridge, MA, USA pp 294-305
24. QuillianMR(1967)Word concepts: a theory and simulation of some basic capabilities. Behav Sci 12:410-430
25. Reiter R (1980) A Logic for default reasoning. Artif Intell 13(1-2):81-132
26. Schaerf A (1994) Reasoning with individuals in concept languages. Data Knowl Eng 13(2):141-176
27. Schlobach S, Cornet R (2003) Non-standard reasoning services for the debugging of description logic terminologies. In: Proceedings of the 18th international joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI'2003), Acapulco, Mexico pp 355-360
28. Schlobach S (2005) Diagnosing terminologies. In: Proceedings of the 20th national conference on artificial intelligence (AAAI'05), Pittsburgh, pennsylvania, USA pp 670-675
29. Schmidt-Schauß M, Smolka G (1991) Attributive concept descriptions with complements. Artif Intell 48:1-26