Skip to main content

Conclusion

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 696 Accesses

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Computer Science ((BRIEFSCOMPUTER))

Abstract

Description Logics have well-known and mature proof procedures based on Tableaux for reasoning on Ontologies and Knowledge Bases. The task of understanding the outcomes of formal proof procedure or consistency tests is sometimes quite hard. Explanations on the reasons for some subsumptions either hold or not are demanding. The latter is in general supported by a human-readable translation of the witness construction obtained by the usual, first-order inspired, Tableaux DL procedure. For the former, however, an explanation should be obtained from the proof resulted by this very Tableaux procedure. In this chapter, we review our contributions and present some possible future works.

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

Buying options

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 EPUB and 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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Baader, F.: The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Baader, F., Peñaloza, R., Suntisrivaraporn, B.: Pinpointing in the description logic \({\rm {el}}+{\cal {EL}}^{+}\). In: Proceedings of the 30th annual German Conference on Advances in Artificial Intelligence, Osnabrück, Germany KI ’07, Lecture Notes in Computer Science. vol. 4667/2007, pp. 52–67. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg (2007). ISBN:978-3-540-74564-8, doi:10.1007/978-3-540-74565-5_7

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bail, S., Horridge, M., Parsia, B., Sattler, U.: The justificatory structure of the ncbo bioportal ontologies. The Semantic Web-ISWC 2011, pp. 67–82 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bozzato, L., Ferrari, M., Fiorentini, C., Fiorino, G.: A constructive semantics for ALC. In: Workshop on Description Logics, pp. 219–226. (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Finger, M.: DAG sequent proofs with a substitution rule. In: Artemov, S., Barringer, H., d’Avila Garcez, A., Lamb, L., Woods, J. (eds.) We will show Them–Essays in honour of Dov Gabbay 60th birthday, vol. 1, pp. 671–686. Kings College Publications, Kings College, London (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gabbay, D.M.: Labelled deductive systems, vol. 1. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gordeev, L., Haeusler, E., Costa, V.: Proof compressions with circuit-structured substitutions. In: Zapiski Nauchnyh Seminarov POMI, (2008) to appear

    Google Scholar 

  8. Haeusler, E.H., de Paiva, V., Rademaker, A.: Intuitionistic description logic and legal reasoning. In: Proceedings of International Workshop Data, Logic and Inconsistency with DEXA, (2011). (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Haeusler, E.H., de Paiva, V., Rademaker, A.: Using intuitionistic logic as a basis for legal ontologies. Informatica e Diritto (Journal on Informatics and Law), 1–2:289–298, (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Horridge, M., Parsia, B., Sattler, U.: Laconic and precise justifications in owl. The Semantic Web-ISWC 2008 pp. 323–338. (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ji, Q., Qi, G., Haase, P.: A relevance-directed algorithm for finding justifications of dl entailments. The Semantic Web pp. 306–320. (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kalyanpur, A., Parsia, B., Horridge, M., Sirin, E.: Finding all justifications of owl dl entailments. The Semantic Web pp. 267–280. (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Mendler, M., Scheele, S.: Towards constructive DL for abstraction and refinement. In: F. Baader, C. Lutz, B. Motik (eds.) Proceedings of the 21st International Workshop on Description Logics, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 353, pp. 13–16. CEUR-WS.org, Dresden, Germany (2008). http://www.ceur-ws.org/Vol-353/MendlerScheele.pdf

  14. de Paiva, V.: Constructive description logics: what, why and how. In: Context Representation and Reasoning. Riva del Garda (2006)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Rademaker, A. (2012). Conclusion. In: A Proof Theory for Description Logics. SpringerBriefs in Computer Science. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4002-3_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4002-3_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4471-4001-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-4002-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics