Encyclopedia of Database Systems

2018 Edition
| Editors: Ling Liu, M. Tamer Özsu

Description Logics

  • Alexander BorgidaEmail author
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-8265-9_1310


Concept languages; KL-ONE style languages; Terminologic languages


Description Logics (DLs) are a family of knowledge representation languages providing features for defining and describing concepts. The associated formal logics answer such questions as “ Is concept C or knowledge base T consistent?” and “Is concept A more specific than (subsumed by) concept B?”

DLs view the world as being populated by individuals, grouped into classes (“concepts”), and related by binary relationships (“roles”). DLs define concepts recursively starting from atomic identifiers by using concept and role constructors. A key characteristic of every DL’s expressiveness is therefore the set of constructors it supports. The collection of constructors considered has been determined empirically, by experience with a variety of tasks in Natural Language processing and other subfields of Artificial Intelligence. Considerable research has been devoted to finding the complexity of reasoning with...

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

Recommended Reading

  1. 1.
    Baader F, Calvanese D, McGuinness DL, Nardi D, Patel-Schneider PF. The description logic handbook: theory, implementation, and applications. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2003.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Berardi D, Calvanese D, De Giacomo G. Reasoning on UML class diagrams. Artif Intell J. 2005;168(1–2):70–118. MATHMathSciNetCrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Borgida A. Description logics in data management. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng. 1995;7(5):671–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brachman RJ. What’s in a concept: structural foundations for semantic networks. Int J Man Mach Stud. 1997;9(2):127–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brachman RJ, Levesque HJ. The tractability of subsumption in frame-based description languages. In: Proceedings of the 4th National Conference on AI; 1984. p. 34–7.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Calvanese D, Lenzerini M, Nardi D. Unifying class-based representation formalisms. J Artif Intell Res. 1999;11(2):199–240.CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Horrocks I, Tessaris S. A conjunctive query language for description logic aboxes. In: Proceedings of the 12th National Conference on AI; 2000. p. 399–404.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    OWL Web Ontology Language Reference. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/
  9. 9.
    Toman D, Weddell G. On keys and functional dependencies as first-class citizens in description logics. J Auto Reason. 2008;40(2–3):117–32. MATHMathSciNetCrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Rutgers UniversityNew BrunswickUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • Avigdor Gal
    • 1
  1. 1.Fac. of IE & Mgmt.Technion--Israel Inst. of TechnologyHaifaIsrael