Position paper: a comparison of two modelling paradigms in the Semantic Web

ABSTRACT

Classical logics and Datalog-related logics have both been proposed as underlying formalisms for the Semantic Web. Although these two different formalism groups have some commonalities, and look similar in the context of expressively-impoverished languages like RDF, their differences become apparent at more expressive language levels. After considering some of these differences, we argue that, although some of the characteristics of Datalog have their utility, the open environment of the Semantic Web is better served by standard logics.

REFERENCES

• 1: R. Agrawal , N. H. Gehani, ODE (Object Database and Environment): the language and the data model, Proceedings of the 1989 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data, p.36-45, June 1989, Portland, Oregon, United States
• 2: Franz Baader , Diego Calvanese , Deborah L. McGuinness , Daniele Nardi , Peter F. Patel-Schneider, The description logic handbook: theory, implementation, and applications, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, 2003
• 3: T. Berners-Lee. Semantic web road map, Sept. 1998. Available at http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Semantic.html.
• 4: T. Berners-Lee, J. Hendler, and O. Lassila. The semantic Web. Scientific American, 284(5):34--43, 2001.
• 5: D. Brinkley and R. V. Guha. RDF vocabulary description language 1.0: RDF schema. W3C Recommendation, http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema, Feb. 2004.
• 6: J. de Bruijn, A. Polleres, R. Lara, and D. Fensel. OWL Flight. Working Draft D20.3 v0.1, WSML, 23 August 2004, http://www.wsmo.org/2004/d20/d20.3/v0.1/.
• 7: Jos de Bruijn , Rubén Lara , Axel Polleres , Dieter Fensel, OWL DL vs. OWL flight: conceptual modeling and reasoning for the semantic Web, Proceedings of the 14th international conference on World Wide Web, May 10-14, 2005, Chiba, Japan [doi>10.1145/1060745.1060836]
• 8: M. Dean, G. Schreiber, S. Bechhofer, F. van Harmelen, J. Hendler, I. Horrocks, D. L. McGuinness, P. F. Patel-Schneider, and L. A. Stein. OWL web ontology language: Reference. W3C Recommendation, http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/, Feb. 2004.
• 9: Francesco M. Donini , Maurizio Lenzerini , Daniele Nardi , Andrea Schaerf, $\{\backslash cal\; A\}\{\backslash cal\; L\}$-log: Integrating Datalog and Description Logics, Journal of Intelligent Information Systems, v.10 n.3, p.227-252, June 1, 1998 [doi>10.1023/A:1008687430626 ]
• 10: F. M. Donini, M. Lenzerini, D. Nardi, A. Schaerf, and W. Nutt. Adding epistemic operators to concept languages. In B. Nebel, C. Rich, and W. Swartout, editors, Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Third International Conference (KR'92), pages 342--353. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco, California, Oct. 1992.
• 11: F. M. Donini, D. Nardi, and R. Rosati. Autoepistemic description logics. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 136--141. International Joint Committee on Artificial Intelligence, Aug. 1997.
• 12: Francesco M. Donini , Daniele Nardi , Riccardo Rosati, Description logics of minimal knowledge and negation as failure, ACM Transactions on Computational Logic (TOCL), v.3 n.2, p.177-225, April 2002 [doi>10.1145/505372.505373]
• 13: Thomas Eiter , Georg Gottlob , Heikki Mannila, Disjunctive datalog, ACM Transactions on Database Systems (TODS), v.22 n.3, p.364-418, Sept. 1997 [doi>10.1145/261124.261126]
• 14: T. Eiter, T. Lukasiewicz, R. Schindlauer, and H. Tompits. Combining answer set programming with description logics for the semantic web. In Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference (KR2004), pages 141--151, June 2004.
• 15: E. Franconi and S. Tessaris. Rules and queries with ontologies: A unified logical framework. In H. J. Ohlbach and S. Schaffert, editors, Principles and Practice of Semantics Web Reasoning: Second International Workshop, number 3208 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 50--60. Springer-Verlag, Sept. 2004.
• 16: Allen Van Gelder , Kenneth A. Ross , John S. Schlipf, The well-founded semantics for general logic programs, Journal of the ACM (JACM), v.38 n.3, p.619-649, July 1991 [doi>10.1145/116825.116838]
• 17: M. Gelfond and V. Lifschitz. The stable model semantics for logic programming. In R. A. Kowalski and K. Bowen, editors, Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Logic Programming, pages 1070--1080, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1988. The MIT Press.
• 18: M. Gelfond and V. Lifschitz. Classical negation in logic programs and disjunctive databases. New Generation Computing, 9(3/4), 1991.
• 19: V. Haarslev and R. Möller. Expressive ABox reasoning with number restrictions, role hierarchies, and transitively closed roles. In A. G. Cohn, F. Giunchiglia, and B. Selman, editors, Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference (KR2000), pages 273--284. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco, California, Apr. 2000.
• 20: P. Hayes. RDF semantics. W3C Recommendation, http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/, Feb. 2004.
• 21: I. Horrocks and P. Patel-Schneider. Reducing OWL entailment to description logic satisfiability. Journal of Web Semantics, 1(4):345--357, 2004.
• 22: U. Hustadt, B. Motik, and U. Sattler. Reducing SHIQ-description logic to disjunctive datalog programs. In Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference (KR2004), pages 152--162, June 2004.
• 23: A. Kalyanpur, B. Parsia, and J. Hendler. A tool for working with web ontologies. International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems, 1(1):36--49, 2005.
• 24: H. Knublauch, R. Fergerson, N. Noy, and M. Musen. The Protégé OWL plugin: An open development environment for semantic web applications. In S. A. McIlraith, D. Plexousakis, and F. van Harmelen, editors, Proceedings of the Third International Semantic Web Conference, number 3298 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 229--243. Springer, Nov. 2004.
• 25: A. Y. Levy and M.-C. Rousset. CARIN: A representation language combining horn rules and description logics. In W. Wahlster, editor, Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI'96), pages 323--327. John Wiley & Sons Ltd., 1996.
• 26: V. Lifschitz. Nonmonotonic datatbases and epistemic queries. In Proceedings of the Twelfth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 381--386, Sydney, Australia, Aug. 1991. International Joint Committee on Artificial Intelligence.
• 27: J. W. Lloyd, Foundations of logic programming; (2nd extended ed.), Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., New York, NY, 1987
• 28: F. Manola and E. Miller. RDF primer. W3C Recommendation, http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-primer, 2004.
• 29: B. Motik, U. Sattler, and R. Studer. Query answering for OWL-DL with rules. In S. McIlraith, D. Plexousakis, and F. van Harmelen, editors, Proceedings of the Third International Semantic Web Conference, number 3298 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 549--563. Springer, Nov. 2004.
• 30: Resource description framework (RDF): Model and syntax specification. W3C Recommendation, http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-rdf-syntax-19990222/, Feb. 1999.
• 31: P. F. Patel-Schneider, P. Hayes, and I. Horrocks. OWL web ontology language: Semantics and abstract syntax. W3C Recommendation, http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/, Feb. 2004.
• 32: R. Rosati. On the decidability and complexity of integrating ontologies and rules. Journal of Web Semantics, 3, 2005.
• 33: Jeffrey D. Ullman, Principles of database and knowledge-base systems, Vol. I, Computer Science Press, Inc., New York, NY, 1988

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  I. Computing Methodologies
  I.2 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
      I.2.0 General

Additional Classification:
  I. Computing Methodologies
  I.2 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
      I.2.4 Knowledge Representation Formalisms and Methods

General Terms:
Design, Languages

Keywords:
Semantic Web, modelling, philosophical foundations, representation