Exploiting SAT and SMT Techniques for Automated Reasoning and Ontology Manipulation in Description Logics

Description Logics (DLs) are a family of logic-based knowledge representation formalisms aimed at representing the knowledge of an application domain in a structured way one of whose main characteristic is the emphasis on reasoning. Since the last two decades Description logics have been widely studied and applied to numerous areas of computer science (including artificial intelligence, formal verification, database theory, natural language processing and distributed computing). In recent years, however, the interest in the problem of automated reasoning in Description Logics has seen a tremendous growth because of the explosion of new notable applications in the domains of Semantic Web and of bio-medical ontologies. The more real-world problems are represented through DL-based ontologies the more these new applications represents a challenge due to the required efficiency in handling complex logical constructors (e.g. numerical constraints) and in handling the huge dimensions of this kind of ontologies. For these reasons the development of efficient algorithms and procedures for reasoning in Description Logic has become crucial. SAT-based technologies, in the meanwhile, proved to be mature and largely successful in many other automated reasoning fields, first of all on many very hard practical applications of formal verification, often huge characterized by problems of huge dimension. In the last twenty years, in fact, we have witnessed an impressive advance in the efficiency of SAT techniques, which has brought problems of hundreds of millions of clauses and variables to be at the reach of the freely-available state-of-the-art solvers. As a consequence, many problems have been successfully solved by mean of SAT-based techniques and these approaches are currently state-of-the-art in the respective communities (among all Model Checking). Furthermore, the progress in SAT-solving techniques, together with the concrete needs from real applications, have inspired significant research on richer and more expressive Boolean formalism, like Satisfiability Modulo Theories (SMT), and on the use of the SAT formalism to solve problems with a wider extent (e.g. to compute interpolants, unsatisfiable cores, all-SAT). The research trends in Description Logic, its manifold practical applications, the quest of efficient and scalable procedures, on one hand, the wide variety of mature and efficient techniques offered by the SAT research area, on the other hand, motivated our research. In this thesis dissertation we explore the idea of exploiting the power and efficiency of state-of-the-art SAT-based techniques for automated reasoning and ontology manipulation in Description Logics, proposing a convenient alternative to the traditional tableau based algorithms. With this aim we propose and develop novel and complete approaches able to solve Description Logic problems as SAT and SMT ones, by mean of sound and complete encodings. On these encodings we develop new procedures and optimizations techniques based on a variety of existing SAT-based formalisms and technologies. In this work, in particular, we focus on three gradually harder reasoning problems in Description Logics which tackle increasingly more expressive languages or increasingly harder reasoning services, among which we face also non-standard services supporting the debugging of ontologies like modularization and axiom pinpointing. We implemented our approaches in tools which integrate with the available SAT/SMT-solvers; finally, we show the effectiveness of our novel approaches through very extensive empirical evaluations on benchmarks and ontologies from real application, in which we compare our performance against the other state-of-the-art available systems. Notice that any advance in the exploited Boolean reasoning techniques/tools will be freely inherited from our proposed approaches extending also to Description Logics/ontologies the benefits of the observable great and fast advance in the efficiency of SAT-based techniques.

[1]  Alberto Griggio,et al.  A Simple and Flexible Way of Computing Small Unsatisfiable Cores in SAT Modulo Theories , 2007, SAT.

[2]  Daniel Kroening,et al.  A First Step Towards a Unified Proof Checker for QBF , 2007, SAT.

[3]  Christos H. Papadimitriou,et al.  On the complexity of integer programming , 1981, JACM.

[4]  Sharad Malik,et al.  Extracting small unsatis able cores from unsatis able boolean formulas , 2003 .

[5]  Bijan Parsia,et al.  Laconic and Precise Justifications in OWL , 2008, SEMWEB.

[6]  Ullrich Hustadt,et al.  An empirical analysis of modal theorem provers , 1999, J. Appl. Non Class. Logics.

[7]  Guilin Qi,et al.  A Modularization-Based Approach to Finding All Justifications for OWL DL Entailments , 2008, ASWC.

[8]  Kenneth L. McMillan,et al.  Interpolation and SAT-Based Model Checking , 2003, CAV.

[9]  Armin Biere,et al.  A satisfiability procedure for quantified Boolean formulae , 2003, Discret. Appl. Math..

[10]  Roberto Bruttomesso,et al.  The MathSAT 4 SMT Solver ( Tool Paper ) , 2008 .

[11]  Moshe Y. Vardi,et al.  Optimizing a BDD-Based Modal Solver , 2003, CADE.

[12]  Boontawee Suntisrivaraporn,et al.  Polynomial time reasoning support for design and maintenance of large-scale biomedical ontologies , 2008 .

[13]  Gilles Audemard,et al.  Bounded Model Checking for Timed Systems , 2002, FORTE.

[14]  Klaus Schild,et al.  A Correspondence Theory for Terminological Logics: Preliminary Report , 1991, IJCAI.

[15]  Inês Lynce,et al.  On Computing Minimum Unsatisfiable Cores , 2004, SAT.

[16]  Volker Haarslev,et al.  Practical reasoning with qualified number restrictions: A hybrid Abox calculus for the description logic H , 2010, AI Commun..

[17]  Bernhard Nebel,et al.  An Empirical Analysis of Optimization Techniques for Terminological Representation Systems, or Making KRIS Get a Move On , 1992, KR.

[18]  Sharad Malik,et al.  Conflict driven learning in a quantified Boolean satisfiability solver , 2002, IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer Aided Design, 2002. ICCAD 2002..

[19]  Ian Horrocks,et al.  The Even More Irresistible SROIQ , 2006, KR.

[20]  Peter Baumgartner,et al.  The Hyper Tableaux Calculus with Equality and an Application to Finite Model Computation , 2010, J. Log. Comput..

[21]  Joseph Y. Halpern The Effect of Bounding the Number of Primitive Propositions and the Depth of Nesting on the Complexity of Modal Logic , 1995, Artif. Intell..

[22]  Christoph Weidenbach,et al.  MSPASS: Subsumption Testing with SPASS , 1999, Description Logics.

[23]  Meghyn Bienvenu,et al.  Complexity of Abduction in the EL Family of Lightweight Description Logics , 2008, KR.

[24]  Sharad Malik,et al.  Chaff: engineering an efficient SAT solver , 2001, Proceedings of the 38th Design Automation Conference (IEEE Cat. No.01CH37232).

[25]  Franz Baader,et al.  Debugging SNOMED CT Using Axiom Pinpointing in the Description Logic EL+ , 2008, KR-MED.

[26]  Alberto Griggio,et al.  Efficient Interpolant Generation in Satisfiability Modulo Theories , 2008, TACAS.

[27]  Franz Baader Augmenting Concept Languages by Transitive Closure of Roles: An Alternative to Terminological Cycles , 1991, IJCAI.

[28]  Armin Biere,et al.  Compressing BMC Encodings with QBF , 2007, BMC@FLoC.

[29]  Rafael Peñaloza,et al.  Complexity of Axiom Pinpointing in the DL-Lite Family , 2010, Description Logics.

[30]  Volker Haarslev,et al.  RACER System Description , 2001, IJCAR.

[31]  Bijan Parsia,et al.  Finding All Justifications of OWL DL Entailments , 2007, ISWC/ASWC.

[32]  Richard E. Ladner,et al.  The Computational Complexity of Provability in Systems of Modal Propositional Logic , 1977, SIAM J. Comput..

[33]  Enrico Giunchiglia,et al.  Reasoning with Quantified Boolean Formulas , 2021, Handbook of Satisfiability.

[34]  Ian Horrocks,et al.  From SHIQ and RDF to OWL: the making of a Web Ontology Language , 2003, J. Web Semant..

[35]  Stefan Schlobach,et al.  Non-Standard Reasoning Services for the Debugging of Description Logic Terminologies , 2003, IJCAI.

[36]  Alan L. Rector,et al.  Web ontology segmentation: analysis, classification and use , 2006, WWW '06.

[37]  Adnan Darwiche,et al.  SAT Solver Description : Rsat , 2006 .

[38]  Volker Haarslev,et al.  A Hybrid Tableau Algorithm for ALCQ , 2008, Description Logics.

[39]  Peter F. Patel-Schneider,et al.  DLP System Description , 1998, Description Logics.

[40]  Boris Motik,et al.  OWL 2 Web Ontology Language: structural specification and functional-style syntax , 2008 .

[41]  Francesco M. Donini,et al.  Concept abduction and contraction for semantic-based discovery of matches and negotiation spaces in an e-marketplace , 2004, ICEC '04.

[42]  Boris Motik,et al.  Hypertableau Reasoning for Description Logics , 2009, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[43]  Ian Horrocks,et al.  Using an Expressive Description Logic: FaCT or Fiction? , 1998, KR.

[44]  David L. Dill,et al.  An Online Proof-Producing Decision Procedure for Mixed-Integer Linear Arithmetic , 2003, TACAS.

[45]  Armando Tacchella,et al.  Backjumping for Quantified Boolean Logic satisfiability , 2001, Artif. Intell..

[46]  Projektgruppe WINOPostfa A Terminological Knowledge Representation System with Complete Inference Algorithms , 1991 .

[47]  Ian Horrocks,et al.  FaCT++ Description Logic Reasoner: System Description , 2006, IJCAR.

[48]  Andrei Voronkov,et al.  How to optimize proof-search in modal logics: new methods of proving redundancy criteria for sequent calculi , 2001, TOCL.

[49]  Edmund M. Clarke,et al.  Model Checking , 1999, Handbook of Automated Reasoning.

[50]  Roberto Sebastiani,et al.  Axiom Pinpointing in Lightweight Description Logics via Horn-SAT Encoding and Conflict Analysis , 2009, CADE.

[51]  Fausto Giunchiglia,et al.  Building Decision Procedures for Modal Logics from Propositional Decision Procedure - The Case Study of Modal K , 1996, CADE.

[52]  Carsten Lutz,et al.  Conjunctive Query Answering in the Description Logic EL Using a Relational Database System , 2009, IJCAI.

[53]  Volker Haarslev,et al.  Expressive description logics via SAT: the story so far , 2009, SMT '09.

[54]  Franz Baader,et al.  CEL - A Polynomial-Time Reasoner for Life Science Ontologies , 2006, IJCAR.

[55]  Mark A. Musen,et al.  The PROMPT suite: interactive tools for ontology merging and mapping , 2003, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[56]  Sherri de Coronado,et al.  NCI Thesaurus: A semantic model integrating cancer-related clinical and molecular information , 2007, J. Biomed. Informatics.

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

[58]  A. Voronkov K? : A theorem prover for K , 1999 .

[59]  Francesco M. Donini,et al.  Design and Results of TANCS-2000 Non-classical (Modal) Systems Comparison , 2000, TABLEAUX.

[60]  Kent A. Spackman,et al.  SNOMED RT: a reference terminology for health care , 1997, AMIA.

[61]  M. de Rijke,et al.  Constraint Programming for Modelling and Solving Modal Satisfability , 2003, CP.

[62]  L. Stein,et al.  OWL Web Ontology Language - Reference , 2004 .

[63]  Peter F. Patel-Schneider,et al.  A New System and Methodology for Generating Random Modal Formulae , 2001, IJCAR.

[64]  Franz Baader,et al.  SNOMED CT's Problem List: Ontologists' and Logicians' Therapy Suggestions , 2007, MedInfo.

[65]  Boris Konev,et al.  Logical Difference and Module Extraction with CEX and MEX , 2008, Description Logics.

[66]  Franz Baader,et al.  Pushing the EL Envelope , 2005, IJCAI.

[67]  Volker Haarslev,et al.  Automated Reasoning in ALCQ\mathcal{ALCQ} via SMT , 2011, CADE.

[68]  Volker Haarslev,et al.  Racer: A Core Inference Engine for the Semantic Web , 2003, EON.

[69]  Niklas Sörensson,et al.  An Extensible SAT-solver , 2003, SAT.

[70]  Bruno Dutertre,et al.  A Fast Linear-Arithmetic Solver for DPLL(T) , 2006, CAV.

[71]  Kent A. Spackman,et al.  Replacing SEP-Triplets in SNOMED CT Using Tractable Description Logic Operators , 2007, AIME.

[72]  Roberto Sebastiani,et al.  Automated Reasoning in Modal and Description Logics via SAT Encoding: the Case Study of K(m)/ALC-Satisfiability , 2009, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[73]  Francesco M. Donini,et al.  Exptime Tableaux for ALC , 2000, Description Logics.

[74]  Ian Horrocks,et al.  Keys, Nominals, and Concrete Domains , 2003, IJCAI.

[75]  Roberto Sebastiani,et al.  Encoding the Satisfiability of Modal and Description Logics into SAT: The Case Study of K(m)/ALC , 2006, SAT.

[76]  Enrico Franconi,et al.  Crack , 1987, The Lancet.

[77]  Armando Tacchella,et al.  Learning for quantified boolean logic satisfiability , 2002, AAAI/IAAI.

[78]  Luca Pulina,et al.  The QBFEVAL Web Portal , 2006, JELIA.

[79]  Ulrike Sattler,et al.  BDD-Based Decision Procedures for K , 2002, CADE.

[80]  Volker Haarslev,et al.  Optimizing Reasoning in Description Logics with Qualified Number Restrictions , 2001, Description Logics.

[81]  Fabio Massacci,et al.  Single Step Tableaux for Modal Logics , 2000, Journal of Automated Reasoning.

[82]  Boris Konev,et al.  The Logical Difference Problem for Description Logic Terminologies , 2008, IJCAR.

[83]  Sharad Malik,et al.  Efficient conflict driven learning in a Boolean satisfiability solver , 2001, IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer Aided Design. ICCAD 2001. IEEE/ACM Digest of Technical Papers (Cat. No.01CH37281).

[84]  Roberto Sebastiani,et al.  From KSAT to Delayed Theory Combination: Exploiting DPLL Outside the SAT Domain , 2007, FroCoS.

[85]  Rafael Peñaloza,et al.  Pinpointing in the Description Logic EL , 2007, Description Logics.

[86]  Fausto Giunchiglia,et al.  SAT-Based Decision Procedures for Automated Reasoning: A Unifying Perspective , 2005, Mechanizing Mathematical Reasoning.

[87]  Albert Oliveras,et al.  SMT Techniques for Fast Predicate Abstraction , 2006, CAV.

[88]  Alberto Griggio,et al.  Satisfiability Modulo the Theory of Costs: Foundations and Applications , 2010, TACAS.

[89]  Franz Baader,et al.  How Pervasive Is the Myerson-Satterthwaite Impossibility? , 2009, IJCAI.

[90]  Boris Motik,et al.  Optimized Reasoning in Description Logics Using Hypertableaux , 2007, CADE.

[91]  Boris Konev,et al.  Semantic Modularity and Module Extraction in Description Logics , 2008, ECAI.

[92]  Yarden Katz,et al.  Pellet: A practical OWL-DL reasoner , 2007, J. Web Semant..

[93]  Joseph Y. Halpern,et al.  A Guide to Completeness and Complexity for Modal Logics of Knowledge and Belief , 1992, Artif. Intell..

[94]  Ian Horrocks,et al.  Just the right amount: extracting modules from ontologies , 2007, WWW '07.

[95]  Volker Haarslev,et al.  Combining Tableaux and Algebraic Methods for Reasoning with Qualified Number Restrictions , 2001, Description Logics.

[96]  Katarina Britz,et al.  KT and S4 Satisfiability in a Constraint Logic Environment , 2008, PRICAI.

[97]  Maarten de Rijke,et al.  Tree-based Heuristics in Modal Theorem Proving , 2000, ECAI.

[98]  Boris Motik,et al.  Individual Reuse in Description Logic Reasoning , 2008, IJCAR.

[99]  Ian Horrocks,et al.  An Analysis of Empirical Testing for Modal Decision Procedures , 2000, Log. J. IGPL.

[100]  Donald W. Loveland,et al.  A machine program for theorem-proving , 2011, CACM.

[101]  Armando Tacchella,et al.  *SAT System Description , 1999, Description Logics.

[102]  Cesare Tinelli,et al.  Satisfiability Modulo Theories , 2021, Handbook of Satisfiability.

[103]  Jana Koehler,et al.  Modal Logics, Description Logics and Arithmetic Reasoning , 1999, Artif. Intell..

[104]  Assaf Schuster,et al.  Memory Efficient All-Solutions SAT Solver and Its Application for Reachability Analysis , 2004, FMCAD.

[105]  Fausto Giunchiglia,et al.  Sat vs. Translation Based Decision Procedures for Modal Logics: a Comparative Evaluation Istituto per La Ricerca Scientifica E Tecnologica Sat vs. Translation Based Decision Procedures for Modal Logics: a Comparative Evaluation , 1998 .

[106]  Ian Horrocks,et al.  A Description Logic with Transitive and Inverse Roles and Role Hierarchies , 1999, J. Log. Comput..

[107]  Rafael Peñaloza,et al.  On the Complexity of Axiom Pinpointing in the EL Family of Description Logics , 2010, KR.

[108]  Ian Horrocks,et al.  OWL Web Ontology Language Reference-W3C Recommen-dation , 2004 .

[109]  Peter Balsiger,et al.  A Benchmark Method for the Propositional Modal Logics K, KT, S4 , 2004, Journal of Automated Reasoning.

[110]  Franz Baader,et al.  Pushing the EL Envelope Further , 2008, OWLED.

[111]  Ian Horrocks,et al.  Reasoning with Individuals for the Description Logic SHIQ , 2000, CADE.

[112]  Rafael Peñaloza,et al.  Axiom Pinpointing in General Tableaux , 2007, TABLEAUX.

[113]  Fausto Giunchiglia,et al.  Building Decision Procedures for Modal Logics from Propositional Decision Procedures: The Case Study of Modal K(m) , 2000, Inf. Comput..

[114]  Francesco M. Donini,et al.  Design and results of TANCS-00 , 2000 .

[115]  Fabio Somenzi,et al.  Efficient Conflict Analysis for Finding All Satisfying Assignments of a Boolean Circuit , 2005, TACAS.

[116]  Yevgeny Kazakov,et al.  RIQ and SROIQ Are Harder than SHOIQ , 2008, KR.

[117]  Fausto Giunchiglia,et al.  SAT-Based Decision Procedures for Classical Modal Logics , 2004, Journal of Automated Reasoning.

[118]  Volker Haarslev,et al.  Algebraic tableau reasoning for the description logic SHOQ , 2010, J. Appl. Log..

[119]  Peter Balsiger,et al.  Logics Workbench 1.0 , 1998, TABLEAUX.

[120]  Moshe Y. Vardi,et al.  Symbolic Decision Procedures for QBF , 2004, CP.

[121]  David S. Johnson,et al.  Computers and In stractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness. W. H Freeman, San Fran , 1979 .

[122]  Franz Baader,et al.  Qualifying Number Restrictions in Concept Languages , 1991, KR.

[123]  Ian Horrocks,et al.  Tractable Extensions of the Description Logic EL with Numerical Datatypes , 2010, IJCAR.

[124]  Ian Horrocks,et al.  Optimizing Description Logic Subsumption , 1999, J. Log. Comput..

[125]  Yevgeny Kazakov,et al.  Consequence-Driven Reasoning for Horn SHIQ Ontologies , 2009, IJCAI.

[126]  Ian Horrocks,et al.  Practical Reasoning for Very Expressive Description Logics , 2000, Log. J. IGPL.

[127]  Fausto Giunchiglia,et al.  A New Method for Testing Decision Procedures in Modal and Terminological Logics , 1996, Description Logics.

[128]  Sharad Malik,et al.  The Quest for Efficient Boolean Satisfiability Solvers , 2002, CAV.

[129]  M. Fitting Proof Methods for Modal and Intuitionistic Logics , 1983 .

[130]  Armin Biere,et al.  Symbolic Model Checking without BDDs , 1999, TACAS.

[131]  Armando Tacchella,et al.  Clause/Term Resolution and Learning in the Evaluation of Quantified Boolean Formulas , 2006, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[132]  Jana Koehler,et al.  Role Hierarchies and Number Restrictions , 1997, Description Logics.

[133]  M. Ashburner,et al.  Gene Ontology: tool for the unification of biology , 2000, Nature Genetics.

[134]  Joao Marques-Silva,et al.  GRASP-A new search algorithm for satisfiability , 1996, Proceedings of International Conference on Computer Aided Design.

[135]  Nachum Dershowitz,et al.  Bounded Model Checking with QBF , 2005, SAT.

[136]  Robert P. Kurshan,et al.  Computer-Aided Verification of Coordinating Processes: The Automata-Theoretic Approach , 2014 .

[137]  Bart Selman,et al.  Encoding Plans in Propositional Logic , 1996, KR.

[138]  Hilary Putnam,et al.  A Computing Procedure for Quantification Theory , 1960, JACM.

[139]  Yevgeny Kazakov,et al.  SRIQ and SROIQ are Harder than SHOIQ , 2008, Description Logics.

[140]  Ian Horrocks,et al.  Experience building a Large, Re-usable Medical Ontology using a Description Logic with Transitivity and Concept Inclusions , 1997 .

[141]  Peter F. Patel-Schneider,et al.  A New General Method to Generate Random Modal Formulae for Testing Decision Procedures , 2003, J. Artif. Intell. Res..

[142]  Marco Benedetti,et al.  sKizzo: A Suite to Evaluate and Certify QBFs , 2005, CADE.