Re: completeness

Michael,

Thanks for the clarification.

Zhe

Michael Schneider wrote:
> Hi Zhe!
>
>   
>> The strong points of pD* are 
>>     
> [...] 
>   
>> 3)  users understand those rules much easier than 
>> model theoretic semantics; 
>>     
>
> It should be made clear that pD* of course /has/ a model-theoretic semantics, which is a super-semantics of RDFS, and a sub-semantics of OWL-1.0-Full. The completeness of the set of triple entailment rules for pD* is actually proven relatively to this model theoretic semantics. 
>
> The nice thing is, however, that because of this completeness result (together with the additional decidability result provided in the pD* paper [1]), "users" of pD* (including implementors) don't really have to care about the model-theoretic semantics. They can instead work just with the rules, without (significant) loss of generality.
>
>   

> Cheers,
> Michael
>
> [1] <http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1570826805000144>
>
> --
> Dipl.-Inform. Michael Schneider
> FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik Karlsruhe
> Abtl. Information Process Engineering (IPE)
> Tel  : +49-721-9654-726
> Fax  : +49-721-9654-727
> Email: Michael.Schneider@fzi.de
> Web  : http://www.fzi.de/ipe/eng/mitarbeiter.php?id=555
>
> FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik an der Universität Karlsruhe
> Haid-und-Neu-Str. 10-14, D-76131 Karlsruhe
> Tel.: +49-721-9654-0, Fax: +49-721-9654-959
> Stiftung des bürgerlichen Rechts
> Az: 14-0563.1 Regierungspräsidium Karlsruhe
> Vorstand: Rüdiger Dillmann, Michael Flor, Jivka Ovtcharova, Rudi Studer
> Vorsitzender des Kuratoriums: Ministerialdirigent Günther Leßnerkraus
>   

Received on Monday, 25 February 2008 15:41:46 UTC