W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > May 2007

OWL reasoning in rules

From: Adrian Walker <adriandwalker@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 08:48:41 -0400
Message-ID: <1e89d6a40705250548u2e1d573fs36e1fcd872b100cf@mail.gmail.com>
To: semantic-web@w3.org
Hi All --

As usual, Matt asks the good questions.

Actually, you can to a large extent have your expressiveness cake and eat

The theory foundation for this is in the paper [1], and [2] is an overview.

As you may know, the underlying inference engine automatically combines
forward and back chaining in order to assign a non-procedural meaning to the

Some examples of reasoning over OWLish data are [3,4,5].  The example [6]
would be a good challenge for OWL.  You are cordially invited to write and
run your own examples.

HTH,                 Cheers,  -- Adrian

[1]  Backchain Iteration: Towards a Practical Inference Method that is
  Enough to be Proved Terminating, Sound and Complete. Journal of Automated
Reasoning, 11:1-22


[3]  www.reengineeringllc.com/demo_agents/OwlResearchOnt.agent

[4]  www.reengineeringllc.com/demo_agents/OwlTest1.agent

[5]  www.reengineeringllc.com/demo_agents/TransitiveOver1.agent

[6]  www.reengineeringllc.com/demo_agents/RelBioOntDefn3.agent

Internet Business Logic (R)
A Wiki for Executable Open Vocabulary English
Online at www.reengineeringllc.com    Shared use is free

Adrian Walker
Received on Friday, 25 May 2007 12:48:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:45:00 UTC