11 citations · 20 across the 17 of their papers we have counts for
17 papers
Why not? Developing ABox Abduction beyond Repairs
Anselm Haak, Patrick Koopmann, Yasir Mahmood +1
Abduction is the task of computing a sufficient extension of a knowledge base (KB) that entails a conclusion not entailed by the original KB. It serves to compute explanations, or…
Concrete Domains Meet Expressive Cardinality Restrictions in Description Logics (Extended Version)
Franz Baader, Stefan Borgwardt, Filippo De Bortoli +1
Standard Description Logics (DLs) can encode quantitative aspects of an application domain through either number restrictions, which constrain the number of individuals that are in…
The Precise Complexity of Reasoning in with -Admissible Concrete Domains (Extended Version)
Stefan Borgwardt, Filippo De Bortoli, Patrick Koopmann
Concrete domains have been introduced in the context of Description Logics to allow references to qualitative and quantitative values. In particular, the class of -admissible co…
Towards Ontology-Mediated Planning with OWL DL Ontologies (Extended Version)
Tobias John, Patrick Koopmann
While classical planning languages make the closed-domain and closed-world assumption, there have been various approaches to extend those with DL reasoning, which is then interpret…
Why Not? Explaining Missing Entailments with Evee (Technical Report)
Christian Alrabbaa, Stefan Borgwardt, Tom Friese +2
Understanding logical entailments derived by a description logic reasoner is not always straight-forward for ontology users. For this reason, various methods for explaining entailm…
Combining Proofs for Description Logic and Concrete Domain Reasoning (Technical Report)
Christian Alrabbaa, Franz Baader, Stefan Borgwardt +2
Logic-based approaches to AI have the advantage that their behavior can in principle be explained with the help of proofs of the computed consequences. For ontologies based on Desc…