Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Embedding defaults into terminological knowledge representation formalisms

  • Published:
Journal of Automated Reasoning Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We consider the problem of integrating Reiter's default logic into terminological representation systems. It turns out that such an integration is less straightforward than we expected, considering the fact that the terminological language is a decidable sublanguage of first-order logic. Semantically, one has the unpleasant effect that the consequences of a terminological default theory may be rather unintuitive, and may even vary with the syntactic structure of equivalent concept expressions. This is due to the unsatisfactory treatment of open defaults via Skolemization in Reiter's semantics. On the algorithmic side, we show that this treatment may lead to an undecidable default consequence relation, even though our base language is decidable, and we have only finitely many (open) defaults. Because of these problems, we then consider a restricted semantics for open defaults in our terminological default theories: default rules are applied only to individuals that are explicitly present in the knowledge base. In this semantics it is possible to compute all extensions of a finite terminological default theory, which means that this type of default reasoning is decidable. We describe an algorithm for computing extensions and show how the inference procedures of terminological systems can be modified to give optimal support to this algorithm.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Baader, F. and Hanschke, P.: A Scheme for Integrating Concrete Domains into Concept Languages. Research Report RR-91-10, DFKI Kaiserslautern, 1991.

  2. Baader, F. and Hanschke, P.: A scheme for integrating concrete domains into concept languages, inProc. 12th Internat. Joint Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, Sydney, Australia, 1991.

  3. Baader, F. and Hollunder, B.: Embedding defaults into terminological knowledge representation formalisms, inProc. 3rd Internat. Conf. on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, Cambridge, MA, 1992.

  4. Baader, F. and Hollunder, B.: How to prefer more specific defaults in terminological default logic, inProc. 13th Internat. Joint Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, Chambery, France, 1993.

  5. Baader, F. and Schlechta, K.: A Semantics for Open Normal Defaults via a Modified Preferential Approach. Research Report RR-93-13, DFKI Saarbrücken, 1993. Also inProc. European Conf. on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning under Uncertainty, Granada, Spain, 1993.

  6. Brachman, R. J.: ‘I lied about the trees’ or, defaults and definitions in knowledge representation,The AI Magazine 6(3) (1985), 80–93.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Brachman, R. J., McGuinness, D. L., Patel-Schneider, P. F., Resnick, L. A. and Borgida, A.: Living with CLASSIC: When and how to use a KL-ONE-like language, in J. Sowa (ed.),Principles of Semantic Networks, Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA, 1991, pp. 401–456.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Brachman, R. J. and Schmolze, J. G.: An overview of the KL-ONE knowledge representation system,Cognitive Science 9(2) (1985), 171–216.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Doyle, J.: A truth maintenance system,Artificial Intelligence 12 (1979), 231–272.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Garey, M. and Johnson, D.:Computers and Intractability — A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness, Freeman, San Francisco, CA, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gottlob, G.: Complexity results for nonmonotonic logics,J. Logic and Computation 2(3) (1992), 397–425.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hollunder, B.: Hybrid inferences in KL-ONE-based knowledge representation systems, in14th German Workshop on Artificial Intelligence, Ebingerfeld, Germany, Vol. 251 ofInformatik-Fachberichte, Springer, 1990, pp. 38–47.

  13. Hollunder, B. and Nutt, W.: Subsumption Algorithms for Concept Languages. Research Report RR-90-04, DFKI Kaiserslautern, 1990.

  14. Junker, U. and Konolige, K.: Computing extensions of autoepistemic and default logics with a truth maintenance system, inProc. 8th National Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, Boston, MA, 1990.

  15. Kautz, H. A. and Selman, B.: Hard problems for simple defaults, inProc. 1st Internat. Conf. on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, Toronto, Ont., 1989.

  16. Kobsa, A.: The SB-ONE knowledge representation workbench, inPreprints of the Workshop on Formal Aspects of Semantic Networks, Two Habours, CA, 1989.

  17. Lifschitz, V.: On open defaults, inProc. Symp. on Computational Logics, Brüssel, Belgium, 1990.

  18. Mays, E. and Dionne, B.: Making KR systems useful, inTerminological Logic Users Workshop — Proceedings, KIT-Report 95, TU Berlin, 1991, pp. 11–12.

  19. MaCarthy, J.: Circumscription — a form of non-monotonic reasoning,Artificial Intelligence 13 (1980), 27–39.

    Google Scholar 

  20. McDermott, D. and Doyle, J.: Non-monotonic logic I,Artificial Intelligence 13 (1980), 41–72.

    Google Scholar 

  21. McGregor, R.: Statement of interest, in K. von Luck, B. Nebel, and C. Peltason (eds),Statement of Interest for the 2nd International Workshop on Terminological Logics, Document D-91-13, DFKI Kaiserslautern 1991.

  22. μBACK, System presentation, inTerminological Logic Users Workshop — Proceedings, KIT-Report 95, TU Berlin, 1991, p. 186.

  23. Nebel, B. and Smolka, G.: Attribute description formalisms ... and the rest of the world, in C. Rollinger and O. Herzog (eds),Text Understanding in LILOG, LNAI 546. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Peltason, C., Luck, K. von and Kindermann, C. (Org.):Terminological Logics Users Workshop — Proceedings. KIT Report 95, TU Berlin, 1991.

  25. Poole, D. L.: Variables in hypothesis, inProc. 10th Internat. Joint Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, Milano, Italy, 1987.

  26. Post, E. L.: Recursive unsolvability of a problem of Thue,Journal of Symbolic Logic 12 (1947), 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Reiter, R.: A logic for default reasoning,Artificial Intelligence 13(1–2) (1980), 81–132.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Reiter, R.: A theory of diagnosis from first principles,Artificial Intelligence 32 (1987), 57–95.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Rymon, R.: Search through systematic set enumeration, inProc. 3rd Internat. Conf. on Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, Cambridge, MA, 1992.

  30. Schmidt-Schauß, M. and Smolka, G.: Attributive concept descriptions with complements,Artificial Intelligence 48 (1991), 1–46.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Schwind, C. and Risch, V.: A tableau-based characterisation for default logic, inProc. 1st European Conf. on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches for Uncertainty, Marseille, France, 1991, 310–317.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Lehr- und Forschungsgebiet Theoretische Informatik, RWTH Aachen, Ahornstraße 55, 52074, Aachen, Germany

    Franz Baader

  2. Deutsches Forschungszentrum für KI (DFKI), Stuhlsatzenhausweg 3, 66123, Saarbrücken, Germany

    Bernhard Hollunder

Authors
  1. Franz Baader
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bernhard Hollunder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Baader, F., Hollunder, B. Embedding defaults into terminological knowledge representation formalisms. J Autom Reasoning 14, 149–180 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00883932

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00883932

Key words

Search

Navigation