Updating Description Logic ABoxes

Description logic (DL) ABoxes are a tool for describing the state of affairs in an application domain. In this paper, we consider the problem of updating ABoxes when the state changes. We assume that changes are described at an atomic level, i.e., in terms of possibly negated ABox assertions that involve only atomic concepts and roles. We analyze such basic ABox updates in several standard DLs by investigating whether the updated ABox can be expressed in these DLs and, if so, whether it is computable and what is its size. It turns out that DLs have to include nominals and the "@" constructor of hybrid logic (or, equivalently, admit Boolean ABoxes) for updated ABoxes to be expressible. We devise algorithms to compute updated ABoxes in several expressive DLs and show that an exponential blowup in the size of the whole input (original ABox + update information) cannot be avoided unless every PTIME problem is LOGTIME-parallelizable. We also exhibit ways to avoid an exponential blowup in the size of the original ABox, which is usually large compared to the update information.

[1]  M. de Rijke,et al.  From Description to Hybrid Logics, and Back , 2000, Advances in Modal Logic.

[2]  Diego Calvanese,et al.  The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and Applications , 2003, Description Logic Handbook.

[3]  Kenneth D. Forbus Introducing Actions into Qualitative Simulation , 1989, IJCAI.

[4]  Ulrike Sattler,et al.  Modal Logic and the Two-Variable Fragment , 2001, CSL.

[5]  Fangzhen Lin,et al.  Embracing Causality in Specifying the Indeterminate Effects of Actions , 1996, AAAI/IAAI, Vol. 1.

[6]  M. de Rijke,et al.  Expressiveness of Concept Expressions in First-Order Description Logics , 1999, Artif. Intell..

[7]  Leszek Pacholski,et al.  Complexity Results for First-Order Two-Variable Logic with Counting , 2000, SIAM J. Comput..

[8]  Tonya Lewis,et al.  Knowledge in Action , 1977 .

[9]  Ian Pratt-Hartmann Complexity of the Two-Variable Fragment with Counting Quantifiers , 2005, J. Log. Lang. Inf..

[10]  Michael Thielscher,et al.  Nondeterministic Actions in the Fluent Calculus: Disjunctive State Update Axioms , 2000, Intellectics and Computational Logic.

[11]  M. Shanahan Solving the frame problem , 1997 .

[12]  Alex Borgiday On the Relative Expressiveness of Description Logics and Predicate Logics , 1996 .

[13]  Maarten Marx,et al.  Handling Boolean ABoxes , 2003 .

[14]  Franz Baader,et al.  Integrating Description Logics and Action Formalisms: First Results , 2005, Description Logics.

[15]  Andreas Herzig,et al.  The PMA Revisited , 1996, KR.

[16]  Gabriel M. Kuper,et al.  Updating Logical Databases , 1986, Adv. Comput. Res..

[17]  Michael Thielscher,et al.  Representing the Knowledge of a Robot , 2000, KR.

[18]  Hector J. Levesque,et al.  Knowledge, action, and the frame problem , 2003, Artif. Intell..

[19]  Francesco M. Donini,et al.  The size of a revised knowledge base , 1995, PODS '95.

[20]  Norman Y. Foo,et al.  Updating Knowledge Bases with Disjunctive Information , 1996, AAAI/IAAI, Vol. 1.

[21]  John G. Gibbons Knowledge in Action , 2001 .