It is well known that many artificial intelligence applications need to represent and reason with knowledge that is not fully certain. This has motivated the study of many knowledge representation formalisms that can effectively handle uncertainty, and in particular probabilistic description logics (DLs) [7–9]. Although these logics are encompassed under the same umbrella, they differ greatly in the way they interpret the probabilities (e.g. statistical vs. subjective), their probabilistic constructors (i.e., probabilistic axioms or probabilistic concepts and roles), their semantics, and even their probabilistic independence assumptions. A recent example of probabilistic DLs are the Bayesian DLs, which can express both logical and probabilistic dependencies between axioms [2–4]. One common feature among most of these probabilistic DLs is that they consider the uncertainty degree (i.e., the probability) of the different events to be fixed and static through time. However, this assumption is still too strong for many application scenarios. Consider for example a situation where a grid of sensors is collecting knowledge that is then fed into an ontology to reason about the situation of a large system. Since the sensors might perform an incorrect reading, this knowledge and the consequences derived from it can only be guaranteed to hold with some probability. However, the failure rate of a sensor is not static over time; as the sensor ages, its probability of failing increases. Moreover, the speed at which each sensor ages may also be influenced by other external factors like the weather at the place it is located, or the amount of use it is given. We propose to extend the formalism of Bayesian DLs to dynamic Bayesian DLs, in which the probabilities of the axioms to hold are updated over discrete time steps following the principles of dynamic Bayesian networks. Using this principle, we can not only reason about the probabilistic entailments at every point in time, but also reason about future events given some evidence at different times. This work presents the first steps towards probabilistic reasoning about complex events over time.
[1]
Rafael Peñaloza,et al.
Bayesian Description Logics
,
2014,
Description Logics.
[2]
Carsten Lutz,et al.
Probabilistic Description Logics for Subjective Uncertainty
,
2010,
KR.
[3]
Adnan Darwiche,et al.
Modeling and Reasoning with Bayesian Networks
,
2009
.
[4]
Rafael Peñaloza,et al.
Tight Complexity Bounds for Reasoning in the Description Logic $\mathcal{BE{\kern-.1em}L}$
,
2014,
JELIA.
[5]
Rafael Peñaloza,et al.
The Bayesian Description Logic ${\mathcal{BEL}}$
,
2014,
IJCAR.
[6]
Umberto Straccia,et al.
Managing uncertainty and vagueness in description logics for the Semantic Web
,
2008,
J. Web Semant..
[7]
Keiji Kanazawa,et al.
A model for reasoning about persistence and causation
,
1989
.
[8]
Rafael Peñaloza,et al.
Context-dependent views to axioms and consequences of Semantic Web ontologies
,
2012,
J. Web Semant..
[9]
Pavel Klinov,et al.
Representing Sampling Distributions in P-SROIQ
,
2011,
URSW.
[10]
Rafael Peñaloza,et al.
Tight Complexity Bounds for Reasoning in the Description Logic BEL
,
2014
.
[11]
Stuart J. Russell,et al.
Dynamic bayesian networks: representation, inference and learning
,
2002
.