<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>32</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">David Carral</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Efficient Reasoning Algorithms for Fragments of Horn Description Logics</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Computer Science and Engineering</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Description Logic</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Knowledge representation</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Reasoning</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2017</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=wright1491317096530938</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Wright State University</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Dayton</style></pub-location><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">70</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">We characterize two fragments of Horn Description Logics and we define two specialized reasoning algorithms that effectively solve the standard reasoning tasks over each of such fragments. We believe our work to be of general interest since (1) a rather large proportion of real-world Horn ontologies belong to some of these two fragments and (2) the implementations based on our reasoning approach significantly outperform state-of-the-art reasoners. Claims (1) and (2) are extensively proven via empirically evaluation.
</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>47</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">David Carral</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Cristina Feier</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Cuenca Grau, Bernardo</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Pascal Hitzler</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Ian Horrocks</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">EL-ifying Ontologies</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Automated Reasoning - 7th International Joint Conference, IJCAR 2014, Held as Part of the Vienna Summer of Logic, {VSL} 2014, Vienna, Austria, July 19-22, 2014. Proceedings</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">description logics</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">OWL</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Rewriting</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Tractable Reasoning</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2014</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08587-6_36</style></url></web-urls></urls><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">464–479</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;The OWL 2 profiles are fragments of the ontology language OWL 2 for which standard reasoning tasks are feasible in polynomial time. Many OWL ontologies, however, contain a typically small number of out-of-profile axioms, which may have little or no influence on reasoning outcomes. We investigate techniques for rewriting axioms into the EL and RL profiles of OWL 2. We have tested our techniques on both classification and data reasoning tasks with encouraging results.&lt;/p&gt;
</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>47</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">David Carral</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Pascal Hitzler</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Extending Description Logic Rules</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The Semantic Web: Research and Applications - 9th Extended Semantic Web Conference, ESWC 2012, Heraklion, Crete, Greece, May 27-31, 2012. Proceedings</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">description logics</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">OWL</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Rules</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2012</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30284-8_30</style></url></web-urls></urls><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">345–359</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Description Logics – the logics underpinning the Web Ontology Language OWL – and rules are currently the most prominent paradigms used for modeling knowledge for the Semantic Web. While both of these approaches are based on classical logic, the paradigms also differ significantly, so that naive combinations result in undesirable properties such as undecidability. Recent work has shown that many rules can in fact be expressed in OWL. In this paper we extend this work to include some types of rules previously excluded. We formally define a set of first order logic rules, C-Rules, which can be expressed within OWL extended with role conjunction. We also show that the use of nominal schemas results in even broader coverage.&lt;/p&gt;
</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>47</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Matthias Knorr</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">David Carral</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Pascal Hitzler</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Adila Krisnadhi</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Frederick Maier</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Cong Wang</style></author></authors><secondary-authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Markus Krötzsch</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Umberto Straccia</style></author></secondary-authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Recent Advances in Integrating OWL and Rules</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Web Reasoning and Rule Systems - 6th International Conference, RR 2012, Vienna, Austria, September 10-12, 2012. Proceedings</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">description logics</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">OWL</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Rules</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2012</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">09/2012</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33203-6_20</style></url></web-urls></urls><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Springer</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Austria, Vienna</style></pub-location><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">7497</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">225-228</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">As part of the quest for a unifying logic for the Semantic Web Technology Stack, a central issue is finding suitable ways of integrating description logics based on the Web Ontology Language (OWL) with rule-based approaches based on logic programming. Such integration is difficult since naive approaches typically result in the violation of one or more desirable design principles. For example, while both OWL 2 DL and RIF Core (a dialect of the Rule Interchange Format RIF) are decidable, their naive union is not, unless carefully chosen syntactic restrictions are applied.

We report on recent advances and ongoing work by the authors in integrating OWL and rulesWe take an OWL-centric perspective, which means that we take OWL 2 DL as a starting point and pursue the question of how features of rulebased formalisms can be added without jeopardizing decidability. We also report on incorporating the closed world assumption and on reasoning algorithms. This paper essentially serves as an entry point to the original papers, to which we will refer throughout, where detailed expositions of the results can be found.</style></abstract></record></records></xml>