Abstract
For ontology reuse and integration, a number of approaches have been devised that aim at identifying modules, i.e., suitably small sets of “relevant” axioms from ontologies. Here we consider three logically sound notions of modules: MEX modules, only applicable to inexpressive ontologies; modules based on semantic locality, a sound approximation of the first; and modules based on syntactic locality, a sound approximation of the second (and thus the first), widely used since these modules can be extracted from OWL DL ontologies in time polynomial in the size of the ontology.
In this paper we investigate the quality of both approximations over a large corpus of ontologies, using our own implementation of semantic locality, which is the first to our knowledge. In particular, we show with statistical significance that, in most cases, there is no difference between the two module notions based on locality; where they differ, the additional axioms can either be easily ruled out or their number is relatively small. We classify the axioms that explain the rare differences into four kinds of “culprits” and discuss which of those can be avoided by extending the definition of syntactic locality. Finally, we show that differences between MEX and locality-based modules occur for a minority of ontologies from our corpus and largely affect (approximations of) expressive ontologies – this conclusion relies on a much larger and more diverse sample than existing comparisons between MEX and syntactic locality-based modules.
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baader, F., Calvanese, D., McGuinness, D., Nardi, D., Patel-Schneider, P.F. (eds.): The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and Applications. Cambridge University Press (2003)
Croarkin, C., Tobias, P. (eds.): NIST/SEMATECH e-Handbook of Statistical Methods. NIST/SEMATECH (2012), http://www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook
Cuenca Grau, B., Horrocks, I., Kazakov, Y., Sattler, U.: Modular reuse of ontologies: Theory and practice. J. of Artif. Intell. Research 31(1), 273–318 (2008)
Cuenca Grau, B., Parsia, B., Sirin, E., Kalyanpur, A.: Modularity and Web ontologies. In: Proc. of KR 2006. AAAI Press/The MIT Press (2006)
Del Vescovo, C., Klinov, P., Parsia, B., Sattler, U., Schneider, T., Tsarkov, D.: Empirical study of logic-based modules: Cheap is cheerful. Technical report (2013), https://sites.google.com/site/cheapischeerful/
Del Vescovo, C., Parsia, B., Sattler, U., Schneider, T.: The modular structure of an ontology: an empirical study. In: Proc. of DL 2010, vol. 573. ceur-ws.org (2010)
Del Vescovo, C., Parsia, B., Sattler, U., Schneider, T.: The modular structure of an ontology: Atomic decomposition. In: Proc. of IJCAI 2011, pp. 2232–2237 (2011)
Del Vescovo, C., Parsia, B., Sattler, U., Schneider, T.: The modular structure of an ontology: Atomic decomposition and module count. In: Proc. of WoMO 2011. FAIA, vol. 230, pp. 25–39 (2011)
Garson, J.: Modularity and relevant logic. Notre Dame J. of Formal Logic 30(2), 207–223 (1989)
Ghilardi, S., Lutz, C., Wolter, F.: Did I damage my ontology? A case for conservative extensions in Description Logics. In: Proc. of KR 2006, pp. 187–197. AAAI Press/The MIT Press (2006)
Horridge, M., Parsia, B., Sattler, U.: Laconic and precise justifications in OWL. In: Sheth, A.P., Staab, S., Dean, M., Paolucci, M., Maynard, D., Finin, T., Thirunarayan, K. (eds.) ISWC 2008. LNCS, vol. 5318, pp. 323–338. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
Horridge, M., Parsia, B., Sattler, U.: The state of bio-medical ontologies. In: Proc. of ISMB 2011 (2011)
Horrocks, I., Kutz, O., Sattler, U.: The even more irresistible \(\mathcal{SROIQ}\). In: Proc. of KR 2006, pp. 57–67 (2006)
Konev, B., Lutz, C., Walther, D., Wolter, F.: Semantic modularity and module extraction in description logics. In: Proc. of ECAI 2008, pp. 55–59 (2008)
Kontchakov, R., Pulina, L., Sattler, U., Schneider, T., Selmer, P., Wolter, F., Zakharyaschev, M.: Minimal module extraction from DL-Lite ontologies using QBF solvers. In: Proc. of IJCAI 2009, pp. 836–841 (2009)
Kontchakov, R., Wolter, F., Zakharyaschev, M.: Logic-based ontology comparison and module extraction, with an application to DL-Lite. Artificial Intelligence 174(15), 1093–1141 (2010)
Lutz, C., Walther, D., Wolter, F.: Conservative extensions in expressive Description Logics. In: Proc. of IJCAI 2007, pp. 453–458 (2007)
Lutz, C., Wolter, F.: Deciding inseparability and conservative extensions in the description logic \(\mathcal{EL}\). J. of Symbolic Computation 45(2), 194–228 (2010)
Sattler, U., Schneider, T., Zakharyaschev, M.: Which kind of module should I extract? In: Proc. of DL 2009, vol. 477. ceur-ws.org (2009)
Smithson, M.: Confidence Intervals. Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences. Sage Publications (2003)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Del Vescovo, C., Klinov, P., Parsia, B., Sattler, U., Schneider, T., Tsarkov, D. (2013). Empirical Study of Logic-Based Modules: Cheap Is Cheerful. In: Alani, H., et al. The Semantic Web – ISWC 2013. ISWC 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8218. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41335-3_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41335-3_6
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-41334-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-41335-3
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)