RE: dependency analysis of OWL axioms

Yes, since one can have a matrix representation of a graph. We also looked at using encoding methods (both for efficient subsumption and other reasoning and prospectively for dependency analysis). For encodings for the former, see the references in our paper:

Obrst, Leo; Dru McCandless; David Ferrell. 2013. Fast Semantic Attribute-Role-Based Access Control (ARBAC). Semantic Technologies for Intelligence, Defense, and Security (STIDS), November 12-15, 2013, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA. http://stids.c4i.gmu.edu/agenda2013.php. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1097/STIDS2013_T18_ObrstEtAl.pdf.

Also see Hassan Ait-Kaci's more recent work on the CEDAR project: http://cedar.liris.cnrs.fr/. Including:

Title: CEDAR: a Fast Taxonomic Reasoner Based on Lattice Operations-System Demonstration<http://iswc2013.semanticweb.org/content/demos/3>
Authors: Samir Amir and Hassan Aït-Kaci
Venue: 12th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2013)<http://iswc2013.semanticweb.org/>, Sydney, Australia
Date: 21-25 October 2013
PDF: [http://cedar.liris.cnrs.fr/images/pdf-icon-32x32.png] <http://iswc2013.semanticweb.org/sites/default/files/iswc_demo_3.pdf>

And:
CEDAR Technical Report Number 12
Title: Design and Implementation of an Efficient Semantic Web Reasoner
Author: Samir Amir and Hassan Aït-Kaci
Date: October 2014
PDF: [http://cedar.liris.cnrs.fr/images/pdf-icon-32x32.png] <http://cedar.liris.cnrs.fr/papers/ctr12.pdf>
Thanks,
Leo

From: Leila Bayoudhi [mailto:bayoudhileila@yahoo.fr]
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2014 12:03 PM
To: Obrst, Leo J.; semantic-web@w3.org
Subject: Re: dependency analysis of OWL axioms

Thank you all
Some works use matrix dependency. Can i adopt it? Is it made manually or consisdering ontologies as graphs.

Le Vendredi 14 novembre 2014 17h42, "Obrst, Leo J." <lobrst@mitre.org<mailto:lobrst@mitre.org>> a écrit :

We had proposed this a number of years ago, but never had time to go down that path. More towards trying to infer "integrity constraints" dynamically (yes, OWL is Open World; integrity constraints are Closed World). Finding the ripple effect of deleting, adding, moving graph nodes that kind of corresponds to "referential integrity" (i.e., structural) in the database world. Since all OWL ontologies (the axioms) can be represented as graphs, it should be doable. How efficiently, I don't know.

I hope someone is doing this these days, and would be interested in what you find out.

Thanks,
Leo

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Leila Bayoudhi [mailto:bayoudhileila@yahoo.fr<mailto:bayoudhileila@yahoo.fr>]
>Sent: Friday, November 14, 2014 6:36 AM
>To: semantic-web@w3.org<mailto:semantic-web@w3.org>
>Subject: dependency analysis of OWL axioms
>
>Hello
>I want to know if there is a tool or an approach realizing dependency annalysis
>of OWL 2 axioms.
>Example:
>by removing a subClassOf axioms , I want to know affected ones in the
>ontology.
>Or, can I do it manually by recognizing different types of axioms and expecting
>relations between them.
>Thank you for answering me.
>--398296598-735493131-1415964971=3759
>Content-Type: text/html; charset=f-8
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
><html><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-
>family:HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-
>serif;font-size:16px"><div>Hello</div><div>I want to know if there is a tool or
>an approach realizing dependency annalysis of OWL 2
>axioms.</div><div>Example:&nbsp;</div><div>by removing a subClassOf
>axioms , I want to know affected ones in the ontology.</div><div>Or, can I do it

>manually by recognizing different types of axioms and expecting relations

>between them.</div><div>Thank you for answering
>me.</div></div></body></html>
>--398296598-735493131-1415964971=3759--

>

Attachments

Received on Friday, 14 November 2014 19:44:10 UTC