Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Handbook of Semantic Web Technologies pp 365–398Cite as

KR and Reasoning on the Semantic Web: OWL

  • Reference work entry

Abstract

OWL is the ontology language recommended by the W3C. OWL is heavily based on the knowledge representation languages called Description Logic, which provide the basic representation features of OWL. OWL also includes facilities that integrate it into the mainstream of the Web, including use of Internationalized Resource Identifiers (IRIs) as names, XML Schema datatypes, and ontologies as Web documents, which can then import other OWL ontologies over the Web. Because OWL is based on Description Logics, its constructs have a well-denned meaning and there are tools that effectively perform inference within OWL, enabling the discovery of information that is not explicitly stated in OWL ontologies.

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

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   499.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   549.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover 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., Calvanese, D., McGuinness, D., Nardi, D., Patel-Schneider, P.F. (eds.): The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation and Applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Baader, F., Hanschke, P.: A schema for integrating concrete domains into concept languages. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 1991), Sidney, pp. 452–457 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Baader, F., Hollunder, B.: KRIS: Knowledge Representation and Inference System. SIGART Bull. 2(3), 8–14 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Baader, F., Lutz, C., Suntisrivaraporn, B.: CEL – a polynomial-time reasoner for life science ontologies. In: Furbach, U., Shankar, N. (eds.) Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conferences on Automated Reasoning (IJCAR 2006), Seattle. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 4130, pp. 287–291. Springer, Berlin (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Batini, C., Lenzerini, M., Navathe, S.B.: A comparative analysis of methodologies for database schema integration. ACM Comput. Surv. 18(4), 323–364 (1986)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bechhofer, S., Goble, C., Horrocks, I.: DAML + OIL is not enough. In: Proceedings of the First International Semantic Web Working Symposium (SWWS 2001), Stanford, pp. 151–159. http://www.semanticweb.org/SWWS/program/full/SWWSProceedings.pdf (2001)

  7. Bechhofer, S., Horrocks, I., Goble, C., Stevens, R.: OilEd: a reason-able ontology editor for the semantic web. In: Proceedings of the Joint German/Austrian Conferences on Artificial Intelligence (KI 2001), Vienna. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 2174, pp. 396–408. Springer, Berlin (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Beckett, D.: RDF/XML syntax specification (revised), W3C Recommendation. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/ (2004)

  9. Biron, P.V., Malhotra, A.: XML schema part 2: datatypes, W3C Recommendation. http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/ (2001)

  10. Brachman, R.J.: A structural paradigm for representing knowledge. Ph.D. thesis, Harvard University, Cambridge (1977). Revised version published as BBN Report No. 3605. Bolt Beranek and Newman, Cambridge (1978)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Brachman, R.J., Schmolze, J.G.: An overview of the KL-ONE knowledge representation system. Cogn. Sci. 9(2), 171–216 (1985)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bresciani, P., Franconi, E., Tessaris, S.: Implementing and testing expressive description logics: preliminary report. In: Proceedings of the 1995 Description Logic Workshop (DL 1995), Rome, pp. 131–139 (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lenzerini, M.: Reasoning in expressive description logics with fixpoints based on automata on infinite trees. In: Proceedings of the 16th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAF 1999), Stockholm, pp. 84–89 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Cornet, R., Spackman, K.A. (eds.): Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Knowledge Representation in Medicine (KR-MED 2008), Phoenix. CEUR, vol. 410. CEUR-WS.org (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Cuenca Grau, B., Horrocks, I., Kazakov, Y., Sattler, U.: Just the right amount: extracting modules from ontologies. In: Proceedings of the 16th International World Wide Web Conference (WWW 2007), Banff (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Cuenca Grau, B., Kazakov, Y., Horrocks, I., Sattler, U.: A logical framework for modular integration of ontologies. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2007), Hyderabad, pp. 298–303 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Fensel, D., van Harmelen, F., Horrocks, I., McGuinness, D., Patel-Schneider, P.F.: OIL: an ontology infrastructure for the semantic web. IEEE Intell. Syst. 16(2), 38–45 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Glimm, B., Horrocks, I., Lutz, C., Sattler, U.: Conjunctive query answering for the description logic SHIQ. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2007), Hyderabad, pp. 399–404 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Golbreich, C., Zhang, S., Bodenreider, O.: The foundational model of anatomy in OWL: experience and perspectives. J. Web Semant. 4(3), 181–195 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Grosof, B.N., Horrocks, I., Volz, R., Decker, S.: Description logic programs: combining logic programs with description logic. In: Proceedings of the 12th International World Wide Web Conference (WWW 2003), Budapest, pp. 48–57. ACM, New York (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Grosso, W.E., Eriksson, H., Fergerson, R.W., Gennari, J.H., Tu, S.W., Musen, M.A.: Knowledge modelling at the millennium (the design and evolution of Protege-2000). In: Proceedings of the 12th Workshop on Knowledge Acquisition, Modeling and Management (KAW 1999), Banff (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Haarslev, V., MoUer, R.: RACER system description. In: Proceedings of the First International Joint Conference on Automated Reasoning (IJCAR 2001), Siena. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 2083, pp. 701–705. Springer, Berlin (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Hartel, F.W., de Coronado, S., Dionne, R., Fragoso, G., Golbeck, J.: Modeling a description logic vocabulary for cancer research. J. Biomed. Inform. 38(2), 114–129 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Hayes, P.: RDF model theory, W3C Recommendation. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/ (2004)

  25. Horridge, M., Bechhofer, S., Noppens, O.: Igniting the OWL 1.1 touch paper: the OWL API. In: Proceedings of the Third OWL Experiences and Directions Workshop (OWLED 2007), Innsbruck. CEUR, vol. 258. http://ceur-ws.org/ (2007)

  26. Horridge, M., Drummond, N., Goodwin, J., Rector, A., Stevens, R., Wang, H.: The Manchester OWL syntax. In: Proceedings of the Second OWL Experiences and Directions Workshop (OWLED 2006), Athens. CEUR, vol. 216. http://ceur-ws. org/ (2006)

  27. Horrocks, I.: Using an expressive description logic: FaCT or fiction? In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 1998), Trento, pp. 636–647 (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Horrocks, I., Fensel, D., Broekstra, J., Decker, S., Erdmann, M., Goble, C., van Harmelen, F., Klein, M., Staab, S., Studer, R., Motta, E.: OIL: the ontology inference layer. Technical report IR-479. Faculty of Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. http://www.ontoknowledge.org/oil/(2000)

  29. Horrocks, I., Kutz, O., Sattler, U.: The even more irresistible SROIQ. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 2006), Lake District, pp. 57–67. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.F., van Harmelen, F.: From SHIQ and RDF to OWL: the making of a web ontology language. J. Web Semant. 1(1), 7–26 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Horrocks, I., Sattler, U.: Ontology reasoning in the SHOQ(D) description logic. In: Proceedings of the 17th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2001), Seattle, pp. 199–204. Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  32. Horrocks, I., Sattler, U.: A tableaux decision procedure for SHOIQ. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2005), Edinburgh, pp. 448–453 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Horrocks, I., Sattler, U., Tobies, S.: Practical reasoning for expressive description logics. In: Ganzinger, H., McAllester, D., Voronkov, A. (eds.) Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Logic for Programming and Automated Reasoning (LPAR 1999), Tbilisi. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 1705, pp. 161–180. Springer (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kalyanpur, A., Parsia, B., Sirin, E., Cuenca-Grau, B., Hendler, J.: SWOOP: a web ontology editing browser. J. Web Semant. 4(2), 144–153 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Kalyanpur, A., Parsia, B., Sirin, E., Hendler, J.: Debugging unsatisfiable classes in OWL ontologies. J. Web Semant. 3(4), 243–366 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Kazakov, Y.: Consequence-driven reasoning for horn SHIQ ontologies. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2009), Pasadena, pp. 2040–2045 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Kershenbaum, A., Fokoue, A., Patel, C., Welty, C., Schonberg, E., Cimino, J., Ma, L., Srinivas, K., Schloss, R., Murdock, J. W.: A view of OWL from the field: use cases and experiences. In: Proceedings of the Second OWL Experiences and Directions Workshop, Athens. CEUR, vol. 216. http://ceur-ws.org/ (2006)

  38. Knublauch, H., Fergerson, R., Noy, N., Musen, M.: The protege OWL plugin: an open development environment for semantic web applications. In: Mcllraith, S. A., Plexousakis, D., van Harmelen, F. (eds.) Proceedings of the Third International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2004), Hiroshima. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3298, pp. 229–243. Springer (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Lawley, M.: Exploiting fast classification of SNOMED CT for query and integration of health data. In: Cornet, R., Spackman, K. A. (eds.) Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Knowledge Representation in Medicine (KR-MED 2008), Phoenix. CEUR, vol. 410. CEUR-WS.org (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Levesque, H.J., Brachman, R.J.: Expressiveness and tractability in knowledge representation and reasoning. Comput. Intell. 3, 78–93 (1987)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Lutz, C.: Reasoning with concrete domains. In: Proceedings of the 16th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 1999), Stockholm, pp. 90–95 (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Lutz, C.: The complexity of reasoning with concrete domains. Ph.D. thesis, Teaching and Research Area for Theoretical Computer Science, RWTH Aachen (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  43. Lutz, C., Areces, C., Horrocks, I., Sattler, U.: Keys, nominals, and concrete domains. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 23, 667–726 (2004)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  44. Lutz, C., Toman, D., Wolter, F.: Conjunctive query answering in the description logic EL using a relational database system. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI 2009), Pasadena, pp. 2070–2075 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  45. MacGregor, R.: Inside the LOOM description classifier. SIGART Bull. 2(3), 88–92 (1991)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  46. Morgan, A.P., Cafeo, J.A., Godden, K., Lesperance, R.M., Simon, A.M., McGuinness, D.L., Benedict, J.L.: The general motors variation-reduction adviser. AI Mag. 26(2) (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Motik, B.: On the properties of metamodeling in OWL. In: Proceedings of the Fourth International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2005), Galway. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3729, pp. 548–562. Springer (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Motik, B., Cuenca Grau, B., Horrocks, I., Sattler, U.: Representing structured objects using description graphs. In: Proceedings of the 11th Internatinal Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 2008), Sydney, pp. 296–306 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Motik, B., Horrocks, I.: OWL datatypes: design and implementation. In: Proceedings of the Seventh International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2008), Karlsruhe. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5318, pp. 307–322. Springer, Berlin (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  50. Motik, B., Sattler, U., Studer, R.: Query answering for OWL-DL with rules. In: Proceedings of the Third International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2004), Hiroshima. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3298, pp. 549–563. Springer, Berlin (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  51. Motik, B., Shearer, R., Horrocks, I.: Optimized reasoning in description logics using hypertableaux. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Automated Deduction (CADE-21), Breman. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 4603, pp. 67–83. Springer, Berlin (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  52. OWL 2 web ontology language conformance, W3C Recommendation. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-conformance/ (2009)

  53. OWL 2 web ontology language direct semantics,W3C Recommendation. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-direct-semantics/ (2009)

  54. OWL 2 web ontology language RDF-based semantics, W3C Recommendation. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-rdf-based-semantics/ (2009)

  55. OWL 2 web ontology language Manchester syntax, W3C Working Group Note. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-manchester-syntax/ (2009)

  56. OWL 2 web ontology language overview, W3C Recommendation. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-overview/ (2009)

  57. OWL 2 web ontology language primer, W3C Recommendation. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-primer/ (2009)

  58. OWL 2 web ontology language profiles, W3C Recommendation. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-profiles/ (2009)

  59. OWL 2 web ontology language structural specification and functional-style syntax, W3C Recommendation. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-syntax/ (2009)

  60. Parsia, B., Sattler, U.: OWL 2 web ontology language data range extension: linear equations, W3C Working Group Note. http://www. w3.org/TR/owl2-dr-linear/ (2009)

  61. Patel-Schneider, P.F.: Small can be beautiful in knowledge representation. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Workshop on Principles of Knowledge-Based Systems, Denver (1984). An extended version appeared as Fairchild Technical Report 660 and FLAIR Technical Report 37

    Google Scholar 

  62. Patel-Schneider, P.F., Hayes, P., Horrocks, I.: OWL web ontology language semantics and abstract syntax, W3C Recommendation. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/ (2004)

  63. Patel-Schneider, P.F., McGuiness, D.L., Brachman, R.J., Resnick, L.A., Borgida, A.: The CLASSIC knowledge representation system: guiding principles and implementation rational. SIGART Bull. 2(3), 108–113 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Maryland Information and Network Dynamics Lab, Pellet OWL reasoner. http://www.mindswap.org/2003/pellet/index.shtml (2003)

  65. Poggi, A., Lembo, D., Calvanese, D., De Giacomo, G., Lenzerini, M., Rosati, R.: Linking data to ontologies. J. Data Semant. 10, 133–173 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  66. Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF): RFC 3987: Internationalized Resource Identifiers (IRIs). Request For Comments (RFC). http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3987.txt (2005)

  67. de Bruijn, J.: RIF RDF and OWL compatibility, W3C Recommendation. http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-rdf-owl/ (June 2010)

  68. Roberts, R.B., Goldstein, I.P.: The FRL primer. Memo 408, Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. ftp://publications.ai.mit.edu/ai-publications/pdf/AIM-408.pdf (1977)

  69. Robinson, A., Voronkov, A. (eds.): Handbook of Automated Reasoning. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2001)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  70. Sattler, U.: A concept language extended with different kinds of transitive roles. In: Gorz, G., Holldobler, S. (eds.) Proceedings of the 20th German Annual Conference on Artificial Intelligence (KI 1996), Dresden. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 1137, pp. 333–345. Springer, Berlin (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  71. Schild, K.: A correspondence theory for terminological logics: preliminary report. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAF 1991), Sydney, pp. 466–471 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  72. Schmidt-Schaufi, M.: Subsumption in KL-ONE is undecidable. In: Brachman, R.J., Levesque, H.J., Reiter, R. (eds.) Proceedings of the First International Conference on the Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 1989), Toronto, pp. 421–431. Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  73. Schmidt-Schaufi, M., Smolka, G.: Attributive concept descriptions with complements. Artif. Intell. 48(1), 1–26 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Sirin, E., Parsia, B., Cuenca Grau, B., Kalyanpur, A., Katz, Y.: Pellet: a practical OWL-DL reasoner. J. Web Semant. 5(2), 51–53 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Spackman, K.: Managing clinical terminology hierarchies using algorithmic calculation of subsumption: experience with SNOMED-RT. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. (2000). Fall Symposium Special Issue

    Google Scholar 

  76. Spackman, K., Campbell, K., Cote, R.: SNOMED RT: a reference terminology for health care. J. Am. Med. Inf. Assoc. pp. 640–644 (1997). Fall Symposium Supplement

    Google Scholar 

  77. Prud’hommeaux, E., Seaborne, A.: SPARQL query language for RDF, W3C Recommendation. http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/ (Jan 2008)

  78. Stevens, R., Baker, P., Bechhofer, S., Ng, G., Jacoby, A., Paton, N.W., Goble, C.A., Brass, A.: TAMBIS: transparent access to multiple bioinformatics information sources. Bioinformatics 16(2), 184–186 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. ter Horst, H.J.: Completeness, decidability and complexity of entailment for RDF Schema and a semantic extension involving the OWL vocabulary. J. Web Semant. 3(2–3), 79–115 (2005)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  80. Tsarkov, D., Horrocks, I.: FaCT++ description logic reasoner: system description. In: Proceedings of the Third International Joint Conference on Automated Reasoning (IJCAR 2006), Seattle. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 4130, pp. 292–297. Springer, Berlin (2006)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Oxford University Computing Laboratory, Wolfson Building, Parks Road, Oxford, OX1 3QD, UK

    Ian Horrocks

  2. Alcatel-Lucent Bell Labs Research, Murray Hill, New Jersey, USA

    Peter F. Patel-Schneider

Authors
  1. Ian Horrocks
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peter F. Patel-Schneider
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ian Horrocks .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Knowledge Media Institute, The Open University, Walton Hall, Milton Keynes, MK7 6AA, UK

    John Domingue

  2. STI Innsbruck, University of Innsbruck, Technikerstraße 21a, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria

    Dieter Fensel

  3. Department of Computer Science, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, 12180, USA

    James A. Hendler

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this entry

Cite this entry

Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.F. (2011). KR and Reasoning on the Semantic Web: OWL. In: Domingue, J., Fensel, D., Hendler, J.A. (eds) Handbook of Semantic Web Technologies. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92913-0_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation