Description Logics

Haarslev R, Moller V. Description of the RACER system and its application. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Description Logics, pages 1-3, DL 2001, Stanford, CA. 

For similar reasons as for the Process Ontology (Subsect. 2.4.6), OWL ( Web Ontology Language, [546]) has been chosen as implementation language. That way, the integration of the Decision Ontology with the other application domain models is simplified, and description logics reasoners such as RacerPro [918] can be used for consistency checks. 

The output format of WOMS-f- is OWL, i.e., work process models are represented by a set of instances of the classes defined in the Process Ontology. Thus, the description logics reasoner RacerPro [918] can conduct the consistency and completeness checks within the modeling procedure. 

Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P. Reducing OWL entaihnent to description logic satisfiability. Journal of Web Semantics 1(5), 345-357 (2004)... 

Horrocks, I. 1998. Using an expressive Description Logic FaCT or fiction In Proceedings ofKR-98, ed. A. G. Cohn, L. Schubert, and S. C. Shapiro, 636 17. San Francisco Morgan Kaufmann. 

Description logic http //www.ida.liu.se/labs/ilslab/people/patla/DL/... 

Baader F, Calvanese D, McGuinness D (2003) The description logic handbook theory, implementation, and applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA... 

Baader, F., Horrocks, I., Sattler, U. Description logics. In Staab, S., Stnder, R. (eds.) Handbook on Ontologies. International Handbooks on Information Systems, pp. 3 28. Springer (2004)... 

Baader, F., Calvanese, D., McGuiimess, D.L., Nardi, D., Patel-Schneider, P.F. (eds.). The Description Logic Handbook Theory, Implementation, and Applications. Cambridge University Press, New York (2003)... 

The Component ontology also declares an inverse relation for hasPar t, namely isPartOf. Note that inverse relations can significantly slow description logic reasoners, and therefore they should be used with care (Rector and Welty 2005). 

Knorr, M., Alferes, J.J., Hitzler, P. Local closed world reasoning with description logics under the well-founded semantics. Artif. InteU. 175(9-10), 1528-1554 (2011)... 

It is obvious that all of these types of inconsistencies can be identified as a logical consequence of contradiction statements. Hence, the use of OWL, its description logics based semantics and the inference types that can be drawn from an OWL model (e.g., whether a concept is satisfiable or whether inconsistencies in the model exist) is an appropriate solution approach. As a consequence, based on the parameter ranges in a feature we formulate a set of possible feature states by means of an OWL concept. Each implication defined in the requirements truth tables can then be specified as a sub-concept of this feature state— an OWL reasoner can consequently determine whether or not this concept is satisfiable, i.e., whether the requirement is consistent to the feature. If implications are over-specified (see, for instance, the specification of the implication Error = None in Fig. 14.10), the respective implication is defined as the intersection of the existing set of implications. If the set of implications is inconsistent, an OWL reasoner identifies the model to be inconsistent, i.e., that there is an inconsistency between the requirements. Finally, test cases are regarded as states of the feature concept and, hence, if contradictions between... 

---