Reasoning with Inconsistent Ontologies: Framework, Prototype, and Experiment

Classical logical inference engines assume the consistency of the ontologies they reason with. Conclusions drawn from an inconsistent ontology by classical inference may be completely meaningless. An inconsistency reasoner is one which is able to return meaningful answers to queries, given an inconsistent ontology. In this chapter, we propose a general framework for reasoning with inconsistent ontologies. We present the formal definitions of soundness, meaningfulness, local completeness, and maximality of an inconsistency reasoner. We propose and investigate a pre-processing algorithm, discuss the strategies of inconsistency reasoning based on pre-defined selection functions dealing with concept relevance. We have implemented a system called PION (Processing Inconsistent ONtologies) for reasoning with inconsistent ontologies. We discuss how the syntactic relevance can be used for PION. In this chapter, we also report the preliminary experiments with PION.

[1]  Pierre Marquis,et al.  Resource-Bounded Paraconsistent Inference , 2003, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.

[2]  Stefan Schlobach,et al.  Debugging and Semantic Clarification by Pinpointing , 2005, ESWC.

[3]  Stefan Schlobach,et al.  Diagnosing Terminologies , 2005, AAAI.

[4]  Alun D. Preece,et al.  Ontology Reconciliation , 2004, Handbook on Ontologies.

[5]  Marco Schaerf,et al.  Tractable Reasoning via Approximation , 1995, Artif. Intell..

[6]  Salem Benferhat,et al.  Handling Locally Stratified Inconsistent Knowledge Bases , 2002, Stud Logica.

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

[8]  Nuel D. Belnap,et al.  A Useful Four-Valued Logic , 1977 .

[9]  Raymond Reiter,et al.  A Theory of Diagnosis from First Principles , 1986, Artif. Intell..

[10]  Pierre Marquis,et al.  Removing Inconsistencies in Assumption-based Theories Through Knowledge-Gathering Actions , 2001, Stud Logica.

[11]  Frank van Harmelen,et al.  Reasoning with Inconsistent Ontologies , 2005, IJCAI.

[12]  Gerhard Friedrich,et al.  A General Diagnosis Method for Ontologies , 2005, SEMWEB.

[13]  Hector J. Levesque,et al.  A Knowledge-Level Account of Abduction , 1989, IJCAI.

[14]  Peter Gärdenfors,et al.  On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions , 1985, Journal of Symbolic Logic.

[15]  Steffen Staab,et al.  Handbook on Ontologies in Information Systems , 2003 .

[16]  Zhisheng Huang,et al.  Inconsistent Ontology Diagnosis: Framework and Prototype , 2005 .

[17]  Graeme Hirst,et al.  Semantic distance in WordNet: An experimental, application-oriented evaluation of five measures , 2004 .

[18]  Grigoris Antoniou,et al.  On Applying the AGM Theory to DLs and OWL , 2005, SEMWEB.