Upload
ivan-varzinczak
View
412
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Work presented at the IJCAI'09 Workshop ARCOE.
Citation preview
First Steps in EL Contraction
Richard Booth Tommie Meyer Ivan Jose Varzinczak
Mahasarakham UniversityThailand
Meraka Institute, CSIRPretoria, South Africa
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 1 / 24
Outline
1 PreliminariesBelief ChangeDescription Logic EL
2 Contraction in ELFirst AttemptA More Fine-grained ApproachOther Types of Contraction
3 ConclusionSummary, Open questions and Further Work
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 2 / 24
Outline
1 PreliminariesBelief ChangeDescription Logic EL
2 Contraction in ELFirst AttemptA More Fine-grained ApproachOther Types of Contraction
3 ConclusionSummary, Open questions and Further Work
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 2 / 24
Outline
1 PreliminariesBelief ChangeDescription Logic EL
2 Contraction in ELFirst AttemptA More Fine-grained ApproachOther Types of Contraction
3 ConclusionSummary, Open questions and Further Work
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 2 / 24
Outline
1 PreliminariesBelief ChangeDescription Logic EL
2 Contraction in ELFirst AttemptA More Fine-grained ApproachOther Types of Contraction
3 ConclusionSummary, Open questions and Further Work
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 3 / 24
Revision, Expansion and Contraction
Expansion: K + ϕ
Revision: K ? ϕ, with K ? ϕ |= ϕ and K ? ϕ 6|= ⊥Contraction: K − ϕ 6|= ϕ
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 4 / 24
Revision, Expansion and Contraction
Expansion: K + ϕ
Revision: K ? ϕ, with K ? ϕ |= ϕ and K ? ϕ 6|= ⊥Contraction: K − ϕ 6|= ϕ
Also meaningful for ontologies
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 4 / 24
AGM Approach
Contraction described on the knowledge level
Rationality Postulates
(K−1) K − ϕ = Cn(K − ϕ)
(K−2) K − ϕ ⊆ K
(K−3) If ϕ /∈ K , then K − ϕ = K
(K−4) If 6|= ϕ, then ϕ /∈ K − ϕ(K−5) If ϕ ≡ ψ, then K − ϕ = K − ψ(K−6) If ϕ ∈ K , then (K − ϕ) + ϕ = K
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 5 / 24
AGM Approach
Contraction described on the knowledge level
Rationality Postulates
(K−1) K − ϕ = Cn(K − ϕ)
(K−2) K − ϕ ⊆ K
(K−3) If ϕ /∈ K , then K − ϕ = K
(K−4) If 6|= ϕ, then ϕ /∈ K − ϕ(K−5) If ϕ ≡ ψ, then K − ϕ = K − ψ(K−6) If ϕ ∈ K , then (K − ϕ) + ϕ = K
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 5 / 24
AGM Approach
Construction method:
Identify the maximally consistent subsets that do not entail ϕ(remainder sets)
Pick some non-empty subset of remainder setsI Take their intersection: Partial meet
Pick all remainder sets: Full meet
Pick a single remainder set: Maxichoice
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 6 / 24
AGM Approach
Example
Contraction of {p → r} from Horn theory K = Cn({p → q, q → r})
p → q
>q → r
p ∧ r → q
p → r
p ∧ q → r
Maxichoice?
Full meet?
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 7 / 24
AGM Approach
Example
Contraction of {p → r} from Horn theory K = Cn({p → q, q → r})
p → q
>q → r
p ∧ r → q
p → r
p ∧ q → r
Maxichoice? H1mc = Cn({p → q}) or H2
mc = Cn({q → r , p ∧ r → q})Full meet?
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 7 / 24
AGM Approach
Example
Contraction of {p → r} from Horn theory K = Cn({p → q, q → r})
p → q
>q → r
p ∧ r → q
p → r
p ∧ q → r
Maxichoice? H1mc = Cn({p → q}) or H2
mc = Cn({q → r , p ∧ r → q})Full meet? Hfm = Cn({p ∧ r → q})
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 7 / 24
Outline
1 PreliminariesBelief ChangeDescription Logic EL
2 Contraction in ELFirst AttemptA More Fine-grained ApproachOther Types of Contraction
3 ConclusionSummary, Open questions and Further Work
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 8 / 24
Description Logic EL [Baader, 2003] with ⊥Concepts
C ::= A | > | ⊥ | C u C | ∃R.C
Interpretations I = 〈∆I , ·I〉
AI ⊆ ∆I , RI ⊆ ∆I ×∆I ,
>I = ∆I , ⊥I = ∅,
(C u D)I = CI ∩ DI ,
(∃R.C )I = {a ∈ ∆I | ∃b.(a, b) ∈ RI and b ∈ CI}
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 9 / 24
Description Logic EL [Baader, 2003]
Axioms C v DI |= C v D iff CI ⊆ DI
TBox T: set of axioms
I |= T iff I satisfies every axiom in T
T |= C v D iff for all I if I |= T then I |= C v D
Cn(T) = {C v D | T |= C v D}
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 10 / 24
Description Logic EL [Baader, 2003]
Example
T = Cn({A v B,B v ∃R.A})
A v B >
B v ∃R.A
A u ∃R.A v B
A v ∃R.A
A u B v ∃R.A
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 11 / 24
Outline
1 PreliminariesBelief ChangeDescription Logic EL
2 Contraction in ELFirst AttemptA More Fine-grained ApproachOther Types of Contraction
3 ConclusionSummary, Open questions and Further Work
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 12 / 24
Motivation
Let T be a TBox and Φ be a set of axioms
Contract T with ΦI we want T 6|= ΦI Some axiom in Φ should not follow from T anymore
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 13 / 24
Following Delgrande’s Approach [KR’2008]
Definition (Remainder Sets)
For a belief set T, X ∈ T↓Φ iff
X ⊆ TX 6|= Φ
for every X ′ s.t. X ⊂ X ′ ⊆ T, X ′ |= Φ.
We call T ↓Φ the remainder sets of T w.r.t. Φ
Do they exist?I EL is compact and has a Tarskian consequence relation
Definition (Selection Functions)
A selection function σ is a function from P(P(LEL)) to P(P(LEL))s.t. σ(T ↓Φ) = {T} if T ↓Φ = ∅, and σ(T ↓Φ) ⊆ T↓Φ otherwise.
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 14 / 24
Following Delgrande’s Approach [KR’2008]
Definition (Remainder Sets)
For a belief set T, X ∈ T↓Φ iff
X ⊆ TX 6|= Φ
for every X ′ s.t. X ⊂ X ′ ⊆ T, X ′ |= Φ.
We call T ↓Φ the remainder sets of T w.r.t. Φ
Do they exist?I EL is compact and has a Tarskian consequence relation
Definition (Selection Functions)
A selection function σ is a function from P(P(LEL)) to P(P(LEL))s.t. σ(T ↓Φ) = {T} if T ↓Φ = ∅, and σ(T ↓Φ) ⊆ T↓Φ otherwise.
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 14 / 24
Following Delgrande’s Approach [KR’2008]
Definition (Remainder Sets)
For a belief set T, X ∈ T↓Φ iff
X ⊆ TX 6|= Φ
for every X ′ s.t. X ⊂ X ′ ⊆ T, X ′ |= Φ.
We call T ↓Φ the remainder sets of T w.r.t. Φ
Do they exist?I EL is compact and has a Tarskian consequence relation
Definition (Selection Functions)
A selection function σ is a function from P(P(LEL)) to P(P(LEL))s.t. σ(T ↓Φ) = {T} if T ↓Φ = ∅, and σ(T ↓Φ) ⊆ T↓Φ otherwise.
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 14 / 24
Following Delgrande’s Approach
Definition (Partial Meet Contraction)
Given a selection function σ, −σ is a partial meet contraction iffT −σ Φ =
⋂σ(T ↓Φ).
Definition (Maxichoice and Full Meet)
Given a selection function σ, −σ is a maxichoice contraction iff σ(T ↓Φ) isa singleton set. It is a full meet contraction iff σ(T ↓Φ) = T ↓Φ whenT ↓Φ 6= ∅.
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 15 / 24
Following Delgrande’s Approach
Definition (Partial Meet Contraction)
Given a selection function σ, −σ is a partial meet contraction iffT −σ Φ =
⋂σ(T ↓Φ).
Definition (Maxichoice and Full Meet)
Given a selection function σ, −σ is a maxichoice contraction iff σ(T ↓Φ) isa singleton set. It is a full meet contraction iff σ(T ↓Φ) = T ↓Φ whenT ↓Φ 6= ∅.
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 15 / 24
Following Delgrande’s Approach
Example
Contraction of {A v ∃R.A} from T = Cn({A v B,B v ∃R.A})
A v B >
B v ∃R.A
A u ∃R.A v B
A v ∃R.A
A u B v ∃R.A
Maxichoice?
Full meet?
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 16 / 24
Following Delgrande’s Approach
Example
Contraction of {A v ∃R.A} from T = Cn({A v B,B v ∃R.A})
A v B >
B v ∃R.A
A u ∃R.A v B
A v ∃R.A
A u B v ∃R.A
Maxichoice? T 1mc = Cn({A v B}) or T 2
mc = Cn({B v ∃R.A,A u ∃R.A v B})Full meet?
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 16 / 24
Following Delgrande’s Approach
Example
Contraction of {A v ∃R.A} from T = Cn({A v B,B v ∃R.A})
A v B >
B v ∃R.A
A u ∃R.A v B
A v ∃R.A
A u B v ∃R.A
Maxichoice? T 1mc = Cn({A v B}) or T 2
mc = Cn({B v ∃R.A,A u ∃R.A v B})Full meet? Tfm = Cn({A u ∃R.A v B})
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 16 / 24
Following Delgrande’s Approach
Example
Contraction of {A v ∃R.A} from T = Cn({A v B,B v ∃R.A})
A v B >
B v ∃R.A
A u ∃R.A v B
A v ∃R.A
A u B v ∃R.A
Maxichoice? T 1mc = Cn({A v B}) or T 2
mc = Cn({B v ∃R.A,A u ∃R.A v B})Full meet? Tfm = Cn({A u ∃R.A v B})What about T ′ = Cn({A u ∃R.A v B,A u B v ∃R.A})?
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 16 / 24
Following Delgrande’s Approach
Example
Contraction of {A v ∃R.A} from T = Cn({A v B,B v ∃R.A})
A v B >
B v ∃R.A
A u ∃R.A v B
A v ∃R.A
A u B v ∃R.A
Maxichoice? T 1mc = Cn({A v B}) or T 2
mc = Cn({B v ∃R.A,A u ∃R.A v B})Full meet? Tfm = Cn({A u ∃R.A v B})What about T ′ = Cn({A u ∃R.A v B,A u B v ∃R.A})?Tfm ⊆ T ′ ⊆ T 2
mc , but there is no partial meet contraction yielding T ′!
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 16 / 24
Outline
1 PreliminariesBelief ChangeDescription Logic EL
2 Contraction in ELFirst AttemptA More Fine-grained ApproachOther Types of Contraction
3 ConclusionSummary, Open questions and Further Work
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 17 / 24
Beyond Partial Meet [Booth et al., IJCAI’09]
Definition (Infra-Remainder Sets)
For belief sets T and X , X ∈ T⇓Φ iff there is some X ′ ∈ T↓Φ s.t.(⋂T ↓Φ) ⊆ X ⊆ X ′.
We call T⇓Φ the infra-remainder sets of T w.r.t. Φ.Infra-remainder sets contain all belief sets between some remainder set andthe intersection of all remainder sets
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 18 / 24
Beyond Partial Meet [Booth et al., IJCAI’09]
Definition (EL Contraction)
An infra-selection function τ is a function from P(P(LEL)) to P(LEL)s.t. τ(T⇓Φ) = T whenever |= Φ, and τ(T⇓Φ) ∈ T⇓Φ otherwise. Acontraction function −τ is an EL-contraction iff T −τ Φ = τ(T⇓Φ).
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 19 / 24
A Representation Result
Basic postulates for EL contraction
(T − 1) T − Φ = Cn(T − Φ)
(T − 2) T − Φ ⊆ T(T − 3) If Φ 6⊆ T then T − Φ = T(T − 4) If 6|= Φ then Φ 6⊆ T − Φ
(T − 5) If Cn(Φ) = Cn(Ψ) then T − Φ = T −Ψ
(T − 6) If ϕ ∈ T \ (T − Φ) then there is a T ′ such that⋂(T ↓Φ) ⊆ T ′ ⊆ T, T ′ 6|= Φ, and T ′ + {ϕ} |= Φ
Conjecture
Every EL contraction satisfies (T − 1)–(T − 6). Conversely, everycontraction function satisfying (T − 1)–(T − 6) is an EL contraction.
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 20 / 24
A Representation Result
Basic postulates for EL contraction
(T − 1) T − Φ = Cn(T − Φ)
(T − 2) T − Φ ⊆ T(T − 3) If Φ 6⊆ T then T − Φ = T(T − 4) If 6|= Φ then Φ 6⊆ T − Φ
(T − 5) If Cn(Φ) = Cn(Ψ) then T − Φ = T −Ψ
(T − 6) If ϕ ∈ T \ (T − Φ) then there is a T ′ such that⋂(T ↓Φ) ⊆ T ′ ⊆ T, T ′ 6|= Φ, and T ′ + {ϕ} |= Φ
Conjecture
Every EL contraction satisfies (T − 1)–(T − 6). Conversely, everycontraction function satisfying (T − 1)–(T − 6) is an EL contraction.
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 20 / 24
Outline
1 PreliminariesBelief ChangeDescription Logic EL
2 Contraction in ELFirst AttemptA More Fine-grained ApproachOther Types of Contraction
3 ConclusionSummary, Open questions and Further Work
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 21 / 24
Other Types of Contraction
Inconsistency-based Contraction [Delgrande, KR’2008]
Let T be a TBox and Φ be a set of axioms
Contract T ‘making room’ for Φ
We want T ′ + Φ 6|= ⊥
Package Contraction [Booth et al., IJCAI’09]
Let T be a TBox and Φ be a set of axioms
Contract T so that none of the axioms in Φ follows from it
Removal of all sentences in Φ from T
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 22 / 24
Other Types of Contraction
Inconsistency-based Contraction [Delgrande, KR’2008]
Let T be a TBox and Φ be a set of axioms
Contract T ‘making room’ for Φ
We want T ′ + Φ 6|= ⊥
Package Contraction [Booth et al., IJCAI’09]
Let T be a TBox and Φ be a set of axioms
Contract T so that none of the axioms in Φ follows from it
Removal of all sentences in Φ from T
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 22 / 24
Outline
1 PreliminariesBelief ChangeDescription Logic EL
2 Contraction in ELFirst AttemptA More Fine-grained ApproachOther Types of Contraction
3 ConclusionSummary, Open questions and Further Work
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 23 / 24
Summary, Open questions and Further Work
Summary
Basic AGM account of contraction for ELWeaker than partial meet contraction
Open questions
Are infra-remainder sets enough?
Is Cn(.) what we really want?
Kernel contraction? (Renata knows the answer ,)
What about the syntax? (A, A u ∃R.A, A u ∃R.∃R.A,. . . )
Current and Future Work
Answer questions above
Full AGM setting: extended postulates
Relation to justifications in ontology repair
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 24 / 24
Summary, Open questions and Further Work
Summary
Basic AGM account of contraction for ELWeaker than partial meet contraction
Open questions
Are infra-remainder sets enough?
Is Cn(.) what we really want?
Kernel contraction? (Renata knows the answer ,)
What about the syntax? (A, A u ∃R.A, A u ∃R.∃R.A,. . . )
Current and Future Work
Answer questions above
Full AGM setting: extended postulates
Relation to justifications in ontology repair
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 24 / 24
Summary, Open questions and Further Work
Summary
Basic AGM account of contraction for ELWeaker than partial meet contraction
Open questions
Are infra-remainder sets enough?
Is Cn(.) what we really want?
Kernel contraction? (Renata knows the answer ,)
What about the syntax? (A, A u ∃R.A, A u ∃R.∃R.A,. . . )
Current and Future Work
Answer questions above
Full AGM setting: extended postulates
Relation to justifications in ontology repair
Booth, Meyer, Varzinczak (MU/KSG) EL Contraction 24 / 24