Search Mailing List Archives
[protege-owl] Query: Subclasses or Sibling
Bert Van Nuffelen
bvn at missioncriticalit.com
Fri Apr 6 08:10:21 PDT 2007
Timothy Redmond wrote:
> On Apr 3, 2007, at 9:03 AM, Thomas Russ wrote:
>> On Apr 3, 2007, at 2:59 AM, william fitzgerald wrote:
>>> Method 2:
>>> I think dealing with individuals is more a rules engine thing than
>>> a DL
>>> reasoner area.
>> That depends on the particular DL reasoner.
>> Other DL languages and reasoners have had mechanisms that are quite
>> capable of reasoning using combinations of closed world reasoning,
>> limited closed world reasoning, and even cardinality restrictions
>> asserted directly about instances.
> This thread has been going on for some time so I may be missing some
> context. But it seems to me that you are making a link between
> reasoning about individuals and closed world reasoning. I think that
> these are two entirely different issues.
> Ian Horrocks, Ulrike Sattler and many others have put a tremendous
> amount of work into finding a reasonable computable description
> logic. There results include algorithms for deciding questions about
> individuals as well as classes. Pellet and Fact use the algorithms
> that they have found so these algorithms are able to do "full OWL
> inference" for individuals. (I am always tempted to use the word
> "complete" here but I don't know if this is one of its technical
> Now when you start talking about closed world reasoning, you are
> talking about a different logic than OWL DL (and even than OWL
> 1.1). There are some suggestions flying around about how OWL can be
> extended to handle the closed world. Two that I know of are
> autoepistemic logics and default logics. There are also
> implementations for these. I believe pellet has an implementation of
> an autoepistemic logic and there was a paper recently about an
> implementation for a default logic.
A better integration with CWA is ID-logic (as it has been called in the
early 2000) now called FO(ID).
This is a logic with is FOL extended with inductive definitions
originally defined by Marc Denecker, KULeuven.
If you look for a nice semantical integration this logic might be the
one you are looking for.
More information about the protege-owl