- From: Enrico Franconi <franconi@inf.unibz.it>
- Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 17:50:28 +0200
- To: Sören Auer <auer@informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
- Cc: Bijan Parsia <bparsia@isr.umd.edu>, public-owl-dev@w3.org
Do you have a soundness and correctness proof of you reduction? It would be interesting to see. --e. On 28 Sep 2006, at 16:58, Sören Auer wrote: > > Bijan Parsia wrote: >> Just out of curiosity, what fragment of OWL does your translation >> handle? I believe LUMB turns out to be in hornSHIQ: > > Good question. I'm not able to say that in two words. > The algorithm first makes some subsumption inferences (currently on > the basis of explicit subClassOf, oneOf, intersectionOf and unionOf > axioms/descriptions). > Classification is done with regard to almost all OWL axioms and > descriptions, by generating a DB view for each description/axiom on > a triple table and combining these views as needed. In case of > mutual recursion, there is currently some approximation used for > computation of an initial class extend, which is refined by a > second run. We didn't use some fix point algorithm due to > performance reasons and for many practical scenarios this doesn't > seem to be needed. > Non-unique names assumption turns out to be problematic, OWLDB does > not check if certain individuals are the same. But I guess that > won't be very problematic, when an individual is listed twice (for > classes/properties of course it's a bigger deal). > I think it's a bit hard to compare the OWLDB approach to classic DL > reasoners, since only subsumption and classification are supported, > both with a different set of (in some cases only partially) > supported OWL descriptions/axioms. > Let me know if you want to have a glance at the paper I'm currently > writing once I have a first draft (might take 2-3 more weeks). > > Cheers, > > Sören >
Received on Thursday, 28 September 2006 15:51:00 UTC