2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.websem.2005.05.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Query Answering for OWL-DL with rules

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
150
0
5

Year Published

2005
2005
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
5
4
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 346 publications
(161 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
150
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…One of the first attempts to overcome the limitations of OWL for representing cycles was DL-safe rules [51]. The extension of OWL ontologies with DL-safe rules allowed certain reasoning tasks to be performed over non-tree-like structures while preserving decidability.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One of the first attempts to overcome the limitations of OWL for representing cycles was DL-safe rules [51]. The extension of OWL ontologies with DL-safe rules allowed certain reasoning tasks to be performed over non-tree-like structures while preserving decidability.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Pellet) because of the DL-safe restriction of the reasoners. DL-safe restriction assumes that all instances of rules, both in conditions and in conclusions, should be available at the knowledge base [17]. Unfortunately, however, the rules for the event extraction generate new instances of events and event attributes in the conclusions.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Besides that, SWRL might lead to undecidable implementation models. Nevertheless, this issue may be overcome by restricting the use of rules for handling only those which are DL-safe [20].…”
Section: Configuration Management Implementation Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%