Description Logics (DLs) are a family of logic-based knowledge representation (KR) formalisms designed to represent and reason about static conceptual knowledge in a semantically well-understood way. On the other hand, standard action formalisms are KR formalisms based on classical logic designed to model and reason about dynamic systems. The largest part of the present work is dedicated to integrating DLs with action formalisms, with the main goal of obtaining decidable action formalisms with an expressiveness significantly beyond propositional. To this end, we offer DL-tailored solutions to the frame and ramification problem. One of the main technical results is that standard reasoning problems about actions (executability and projection), as well as the plan existence problem are decidable if one restricts the logic for describing action pre- and post-conditions and the state of the world to decidable Description Logics. A smaller part of the work is related to decidable extensions of Description Logics with concrete datatypes, most importantly with those allowing to refer to the notions of space and time.

Aus der Einleitung: „Description logics (DLs) are a family of logical formalisms well-suited for the representation of and reasoning about conceptual knowledge on an abstract logical level. However, for many knowledge representation applications, it is essential to integrate the abstract logical knowledge with knowledge of a more concrete nature. As an example, consider the modeling of manufacturing processes, where it is necessary to represent 'abstract' entities like subprocesses and workpieces and also 'concrete' knowledge, e.g., about the duration of processes and physical dimensions of the manufactured objects [2; 25].”

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.

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.

In the area of Description Logic (DL) based knowledge representation, research on reasoning w.r.t. general terminologies has mainly focused on very expressive DLs. Recently, though, it was shown for the DL EL, providing only the constructors conjunction and existential restriction, that the subsumption problem w.r.t. cyclic terminologies can be decided in polynomial time, a surprisingly low upper bound. In this paper, we show that even admitting general concept inclusion (GCI) axioms and role hierarchies in EL terminologies preserves the polynomial time upper bound for subsumption. We also show that subsumption becomes co-NP hard when adding one of the constructors number restriction, disjunction, and `allsome', an operator used in the DL k-rep. An interesting implication of the first result is that reasoning over the widely used medical terminology snomed is possible in polynomial time.

The Description Logic EL is an inexpressive knowledge representation language, which nevertheless has recently drawn considerable attention in the knowledge representation and the ontology community since, on the one hand, important inference problems such as the subsumption problem are polynomial. On the other hand, EL is used to define large biomedical ontologies. Unification in Description Logics has been proposed as a novel inference service that can, for example, be used to detect redundancies in ontologies. In a recent paper, we have shown that unification in EL is NP-complete, and thus of a complexity that is considerably lower than in other Description Logics of comparably restricted expressive power. In this paper, we introduce a new NP-algorithm for solving unification problem in EL, which is based on a reduction to satisfiability in propositional logic (SAT). The advantage of this new algorithm is, on the one hand, that it allows us to employ highly optimized state of the art SAT solverswhen implementing an EL-unification algorithm. On the other hand, this reduction provides us with a proof of the fact that EL-unification is in NP that is much simpler than the one given in our previous paper on EL-unification.

Die hier zur Verfügung gestellte Datei ist leider nicht vollständig, aus technischen Gründen sind die folgenden Anhänge leider nicht enthalten: Anhang 3: Begriffshierarchie "verarbeitungstechnische Funktion" S. 141 Anhang 4: Begriffshierarchie "Eigenschaftsänderung" S. 144 Anhang 5: Begriffshierarchie "Verarbeitungsgut" S. 149 Anhang 6: Begriffshierarchie "Verarbeitungstechnisches Prinzip" S. 151 Konsultieren Sie die Druckausgabe, die Sie im Bestand der SLUB Dresden finden: http://slubdd.de/katalog?TN_libero_mab21079933

While automated game playing systems like Deep Blue perform excellent within their domain, handling a different game or even a slight change of rules is impossible without intervention of the programmer. Considered a great challenge for Artificial Intelligence, General Game Playing is concerned with the development of techniques that enable computer programs to play arbitrary, possibly unknown n-player games given nothing but the game rules in a tailor-made description language. A key to success in this endeavour is the ability to reliably extract hidden game-specific features from a given game description automatically. An informed general game player can efficiently play a game by exploiting structural game properties to choose the currently most appropriate algorithm, to construct a suited heuristic, or to apply techniques that reduce the search space. In addition, an automated method for property extraction can provide valuable assistance for the discovery of specification bugs during game design by providing information about the mechanics of the currently specified game description. The recent extension of the description language to games with incomplete information and elements of chance further induces the need for the detection of game properties involving player knowledge in several stages of the game. In this thesis, we develop a formal proof method for the automatic acquisition of rich game-specific invariance properties. To this end, we first introduce a simple yet expressive property description language to address knowledge-free game properties which may involve arbitrary finite sequences of successive game states. We specify a semantic based on state transition systems over the Game Description Language, and develop a provably correct formal theory which allows to show the validity of game properties with respect to their semantic across all reachable game states. Our proof theory does not require to visit every single reachable state. Instead, it applies an induction principle on the game rules based on the generation of answer set programs, allowing to apply any off-the-shelf answer set solver to practically verify invariance properties even in complex games whose state space cannot totally be explored. To account for the recent extension of the description language to games with incomplete information and elements of chance, we correctly extend our induction method to properties involving player knowledge. With an extensive evaluation we show its practical applicability even in complex games.

Facing the growing amount of information in today's society, the task of specifying human knowledge in a way that can be unambiguously processed by computers becomes more and more important. Two acknowledged fields in this evolving scientific area of Knowledge Representation are Description Logics (DL) and Formal Concept Analysis (FCA). While DL concentrates on characterizing domains via logical statements and inferring knowledge from these characterizations, FCA builds conceptual hierarchies on the basis of present data. This work introduces Relational Exploration, a method for acquiring complete relational knowledge about a domain of interest by successively consulting a domain expert without ever asking redundant questions. This is achieved by combining DL and FCA: DL formalisms are used for defining FCA attributes while FCA exploration techniques are deployed to obtain or refine DL knowledge specifications.

Description Logics (DLs) are a class of knowledge representation formalisms that can represent terminological and assertional knowledge using a well-defined semantics. Often, knowledge engineers are experts in their own fields, but not in logics, and require assistance in the process of ontology design. This thesis presents three methods that can extract terminological knowledge from existing data and thereby assist in the design process. They are based on similar formalisms from Formal Concept Analysis (FCA), in particular the Next-Closure Algorithm and Attribute-Exploration. The first of the three methods computes terminological knowledge from the data, without any expert interaction. The two other methods use expert interaction where a human expert can confirm each terminological axiom or refute it by providing a counterexample. These two methods differ only in the way counterexamples are provided.