Techreport3042: Unterschied zwischen den Versionen
Ame (Diskussion | Beiträge) |
Ame (Diskussion | Beiträge) |
||
Zeile 14: | Zeile 14: | ||
{{Publikation Details | {{Publikation Details | ||
|Abstract=Description logics of minimal knowledge and negation as failure (MKNF-DLs) are formalisms which augment description logics (DLs) with the modal operators K representing `knowledge' and A representing `default assumption'. Such hybrid formalisms are useful in characterizing many nonmonotonic features which can not captured in pure DLs. The traditional semantics employed for MKNF-DLs is based on the possible world approach where each world corresponds to a DL interpretation. Further, the semantics requires the interpretations to share a common domain and to interpret constants rigidly across the worlds. In this paper we argue that these restrictions lead to unintended effects when an expressive MKNF-DL like \mathcal{SROIQK}_\mathcal{NF} is considered. We thus propose employing the extended semantics, introduced recently, for \mathcal{SROIQK}_\mathcal{NF}. We then provide a comparison between the traditional and the extended semantics including a comparison from first-order modal logic perspective. In addition, we present a methodology for performing reasoning tasks in \mathcal{SROIQK}_\mathcal{NF}. | |Abstract=Description logics of minimal knowledge and negation as failure (MKNF-DLs) are formalisms which augment description logics (DLs) with the modal operators K representing `knowledge' and A representing `default assumption'. Such hybrid formalisms are useful in characterizing many nonmonotonic features which can not captured in pure DLs. The traditional semantics employed for MKNF-DLs is based on the possible world approach where each world corresponds to a DL interpretation. Further, the semantics requires the interpretations to share a common domain and to interpret constants rigidly across the worlds. In this paper we argue that these restrictions lead to unintended effects when an expressive MKNF-DL like \mathcal{SROIQK}_\mathcal{NF} is considered. We thus propose employing the extended semantics, introduced recently, for \mathcal{SROIQK}_\mathcal{NF}. We then provide a comparison between the traditional and the extended semantics including a comparison from first-order modal logic perspective. In addition, we present a methodology for performing reasoning tasks in \mathcal{SROIQK}_\mathcal{NF}. | ||
+ | |Download=MKNF-DL.pdf, | ||
|Projekt=ExpresST | |Projekt=ExpresST | ||
|Forschungsgruppe=Wissensmanagement | |Forschungsgruppe=Wissensmanagement | ||
}} | }} |
Version vom 16. Dezember 2013, 11:19 Uhr
Published: 2013
Dezember
Type: Technical Report
Institution: Institut AIFB
Erscheinungsort / Ort: Karlsruhe
Archivierungsnummer:3042
Kurzfassung
Description logics of minimal knowledge and negation as failure (MKNF-DLs) are formalisms which augment description logics (DLs) with the modal operators K representing `knowledge' and A representing `default assumption'. Such hybrid formalisms are useful in characterizing many nonmonotonic features which can not captured in pure DLs. The traditional semantics employed for MKNF-DLs is based on the possible world approach where each world corresponds to a DL interpretation. Further, the semantics requires the interpretations to share a common domain and to interpret constants rigidly across the worlds. In this paper we argue that these restrictions lead to unintended effects when an expressive MKNF-DL like \mathcal{SROIQK}_\mathcal{NF} is considered. We thus propose employing the extended semantics, introduced recently, for \mathcal{SROIQK}_\mathcal{NF}. We then provide a comparison between the traditional and the extended semantics including a comparison from first-order modal logic perspective. In addition, we present a methodology for performing reasoning tasks in \mathcal{SROIQK}_\mathcal{NF}.
Download: Media:MKNF-DL.pdf