We live in an era of data and information, where an immeasurable amount of discoveries, findings, events, news, and transactions are generated every second. Governments, companies, or individuals have to employ and process all that data for knowledge-based decision-making (i.e. a decision-making process that uses predetermined criteria to measure and ensure the optimal outcome for a specific topic), which then prompt them to view the knowledge as valuable resource. In this knowledge-based view, the capability to create and utilize knowledge is the key source of an organization or individual’s competitive advantage. This dynamic nature of knowledge leads us to the study of belief revision (or belief change), an area which emerged from work in philosophy and then impacted further developments in computer science and artificial intelligence. In belief revision area, the AGM postulates by Alchourrón, Gärdenfors, and Makinson continue to represent a cornerstone in research related to belief change. Katsuno and Mendelzon (K&M) adopted the AGM postulates for changing belief bases and characterized AGM belief base revision in propositional logic over finite signatures. In this thesis, two research directions are considered. In the first, by considering the semantic point of view, we generalize K&M’s approach to the setting of (multiple) base revision in arbitrary Tarskian logics, covering all logics with a classical model-theoretic semantics and hence a wide variety of logics used in knowledge representation and beyond. Our generic formulation applies to various notions of “base”, such as belief sets, arbitrary or finite sets of sentences, or single sentences. The core result is a representation theorem showing a two-way correspondence between AGM base revision operators and certain “assignments”: functions mapping belief bases to total — yet not transitive — “preference” relations between interpretations. Alongside, we present a companion result for the case when the AGM postulate of syntax-independence is abandoned. We also provide a characterization of all logics for which our result can be strengthened to assignments producing transitive preference relations (as in K&M’s original work), giving rise to two more representation theorems for such logics, according to syntax dependence vs. independence. The second research direction in this thesis explores two approaches for revising description logic knowledge bases under fixed-domain semantics, namely model-based approach and individual-based approach. In this logical setting, models of the knowledge bases can be enumerated and can be computed to produce the revision result, semantically. We show a characterization of the AGM revision operator for this logic and present a concrete model-based revision approach via distance between interpretations. In addition, by weakening the KB based on certain domain elements, a novel individual-based revision operator is provided as an alternative approach.

We discuss two ways of using abduction to explain missing entailments from description logic knowledge bases, one more common, one more unusual, and then have a closer look at how current results/implementations on abduction could be used towards generating such explanations, and what still needs to be done. / This is an extended version of an article submitted to XLoKR 2021.

Most of the research on temporalized Description Logics (DLs) has concentrated on the case where temporal operators can occur within DL concept descriptions. In this setting, reasoning usually becomes quite hard if rigid roles, i.e., roles whose interpretation does not change over time, are available. In this paper, we consider the case where temporal operators are allowed to occur only in front of DL axioms (i.e., ABox assertions and general concept inclusion axioms), but not inside of concepts descriptions. As the temporal component, we use linear temporal logic (LTL) and in the DL component we consider the basic DL ALC. We show that reasoning in the presence of rigid roles becomes considerably simpler in this setting.

Axiom pinpointing has been introduced in description logics (DLs) to help the used understand the reasons why consequences hold by computing minimal subsets of the knowledge base that have the consequence in consideration. Several pinpointing algorithms have been described as extensions of the standard tableau-based reasoning algorithms for deciding consequences from DL knowledge bases. Although these extensions are based on similar ideas, they are all introduced for a particular tableau-based algorithm for a particular DL, using specific traits of them. In the past, we have developed a general approach for extending tableau-based algorithms into pinpointing algorithms. In this paper we explore some issues of termination of general tableaux and their pinpointing extensions. We also define a subclass of tableaux that allows the use of so-called blocking conditions, which stop the execution of the algorithm once a pattern is found, and adapt the pinpointing extensions accordingly, guaranteeing its correctness and termination.

Non-standard inferences are particularly useful in the bottom-up construction of ontologies in description logics. One of the more common non-standard reasoning tasks is the most specific concept (msc) for an ABox-individual. In this paper we present similar non-standard reasoning task: most specific concepts for models (model-mscs). We show that, although they look similar to ABox-mscs their computational behaviour can be different. We present constructions for model-mscs in FL₀ and FLE with cyclic TBoxes and for ALC∪∗ with acyclic TBoxes. Since subsumption in FLE with cyclic TBoxes has not been examined previously, we present a characterization of subsumption and give a construction for the least common subsumer in this setting.

When trying to apply recently developed approaches for updating Description Logic ABoxes in the context of an action programming language, one encounters two problems. First, updates generate so-called Boolean ABoxes, which cannot be handled by traditional Description Logic reasoners. Second, iterated update operations result in very large Boolean ABoxes, which, however, contain a huge amount of redundant information. In this paper, we address both issues from a practical point of view.

Consider an ontology T where every axiom is labeled with an element of a lattice (L, ≤). Then every element l of L determines a sub-ontology Tl, which consists of the axioms of T whose labels are greater or equal to l. These labels may be interpreted as required access rights, in which case Tl is the sub-ontology that a user with access right l is allowed to see, or as trust levels, in which case Tl consists of those axioms that we trust with level at least l. Given a consequence α (such as a subsumption relationship between concepts) that follows from the whole ontology T, we want to know from which of the sub-ontologies Tl determined by lattice elements l the consequence α still follows. However, instead of reasoning with Tl in the deployment phase of the ontology, we want to pre-compute this information during the development phase. More precisely, we want to compute what we call a boundary for α, i.e., an element μα of L such that α follows from T l iff l ≤ μα. In this paper we show that, under certain restrictions on the elements l used to define the sub-ontologies, such a boundary always exists, and we describe black-box approaches for computing it that are generalizations of approaches for axiom pinpointing in description logics. We also present first experimental results that compare the efficiency of these approaches on real-world ontologies.

Motivated by a chemical process engineering application, we introduce a new concept constructor in Description Logics (DLs), an n-ary variant of the existential restriction constructor, which generalizes both the usual existential restrictions and so-called qualified number restrictions. We show that the new constructor can be expressed in ALCQ, the extension of the basic DL ALC by qualified number restrictions. However, this representation results in an exponential blow-up. By giving direct algorithms for ALC extended with the new constructor, we can show that the complexity of reasoning in this new DL is actually not harder than the one of reasoning in ALCQ. Moreover, in our chemical process engineering application, a restricted DL that provides only the new constructor together with conjunction, and satisfies an additional restriction on the occurrence of roles names, is sufficient. For this DL, the subsumption problem is polynomial. / Short versions of this report have also appeared in Proc. of KI'05 and Proc. of DL'05.

Aus dem Abstract: 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.

We propose an approach for extending both the terminological and the assertional part of a Description Logic knowledge base by using information provided by the assertional part and by a domain expert. The use of techniques from Formal Concept Analysis ensures that, on the one hand, the interaction with the expert is kept to a minimum, and, on the other hand, we can show that the extended knowledge base is complete in a certain sense.