Change paths in reasoning! Raphael Volz FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik Universität Karlsruhe (TH) Karlsruhe, Germany 11....
Proposition <ul><li>We need a consensus benchmark </li></ul><ul><li>Approximate is better than nothing </li></ul><ul><li>T...
We need a consensus benchmark (1) Recent Performance Benchmark @ FZI Note: Joint work with Jürgen Bock, Qiu Ji, Peter Haas...
We need a consensus benchmark (2) Shortcomings of various benchmarks Source: Timo Weithörner et al., What‘s wrong with owl...
Need for a consensus benchmark (3) Improvements Achieved with TREC Source: E. M. Voorhees,  TREC: Improving Information Ac...
Approximate is better than nothing (1) Ontologies in WATSON Corpus Source: Mathieu d‘Acquin et al.,  Characterizing Knowle...
Approximate is better than nothing (2) <ul><li>Idea derived from FOL work </li></ul>Source: Hitzler and Vrandecic, Resolut...
Approximate is better than nothing (3) <ul><li>Idea derived from FOL work </li></ul>Source: Hitzler and Vrandecic, Resolut...
Approximate is better than nothing (3) <ul><li>Syntactic approaches ( possibly unsound ) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Stuckenschm...
Tractable languages make speed (1)  Dez 2003 - DAML.ORG Corpus Source: Mathieu d‘Acquin et al.,  Characterizing Knowledge ...
Tractable languages make speed (2) Source: Markus Krötzsch, Sebastian Rudolph, and Pascal Hitzler;  Complexity of Horn Des...
Incremental reasoning is smart (1) Incremental answers is what we expect on the web Standard expectation for query answeri...
Incremental reasoning is smart (2) <ul><li>Alternate possible interpretations of incremental reasoning </li></ul><ul><ul><...
The ideal Semantic  WEB  reasoning approach time Quality as a combination  of soundness  and completness <ul><li>Functiona...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Change Paths In Reasoning !

1,374 views

Published on

Presentation of my position paper published at the "New forms of reasoning" ISWC workshop.

Published in: Economy & Finance, Education
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,374
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
31
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
36
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Change Paths In Reasoning !

    1. 1. Change paths in reasoning! Raphael Volz FZI Forschungszentrum Informatik Universität Karlsruhe (TH) Karlsruhe, Germany 11.11.2007
    2. 2. Proposition <ul><li>We need a consensus benchmark </li></ul><ul><li>Approximate is better than nothing </li></ul><ul><li>Tractable languages make speed </li></ul><ul><li>Incremental reasoning is smart </li></ul>
    3. 3. We need a consensus benchmark (1) Recent Performance Benchmark @ FZI Note: Joint work with Jürgen Bock, Qiu Ji, Peter Haase, Pellet performance close to Racer, Sesame preformance close to OWLIM Is this evaluation representative???
    4. 4. We need a consensus benchmark (2) Shortcomings of various benchmarks Source: Timo Weithörner et al., What‘s wrong with owl benchmarks, Proc. of 2nd int. Workshop on Scalable Semantic Web Knowledge Base Systems (SSWS 2006)
    5. 5. Need for a consensus benchmark (3) Improvements Achieved with TREC Source: E. M. Voorhees, TREC: Improving Information Access through Evaluation, American Society for Information Science and Technology   Vol. 32, No. 1  Oct/Nov 2005 Consensus Metric Consensus Data Sets
    6. 6. Approximate is better than nothing (1) Ontologies in WATSON Corpus Source: Mathieu d‘Acquin et al., Characterizing Knowledge on the Semantic Web with Watson, EON 2007 Workshop, Busan, Korea We need to approximate with OWL DL reasoners
    7. 7. Approximate is better than nothing (2) <ul><li>Idea derived from FOL work </li></ul>Source: Hitzler and Vrandecic, Resolution-based approximate reasoning for OWL DL, in Y. Gil et al. (Eds.): Proc. of ISWC 2005, LNCS 3729, pp. 383–397, 2005.
    8. 8. Approximate is better than nothing (3) <ul><li>Idea derived from FOL work </li></ul>Source: Hitzler and Vrandecic, Resolution-based approximate reasoning for OWL DL, in Y. Gil et al. (Eds.): Proc. of ISWC 2005, LNCS 3729, pp. 383–397, 2005.
    9. 9. Approximate is better than nothing (3) <ul><li>Syntactic approaches ( possibly unsound ) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Stuckenschmidt & van Harmelen 2002 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Wache, Groot, & Stuckenschmidt 2005 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Hitzler & Vrandecic 2005 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Groot, Stuckenschmidt & Wache 2005 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Hurtado, Poulovassilis, & Wood 2006 </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Approaches based on Knowledge Compilation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Selman & Kautz 1991 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Pan & Thomas 2007 </li></ul></ul>
    10. 10. Tractable languages make speed (1) Dez 2003 - DAML.ORG Corpus Source: Mathieu d‘Acquin et al., Characterizing Knowledge on the Semantic Web with Watson, EON 2007 Workshop, Busan, Korea Jul 2007 - WATSON Corpus Source: Raphael Volz, Web Ontology Reasoning with logic databases, dissertation, university of karlsruhe, 2004 Tractable Languages dominate (and will continue to do so)
    11. 11. Tractable languages make speed (2) Source: Markus Krötzsch, Sebastian Rudolph, and Pascal Hitzler; Complexity of Horn Description Logics Technical Report, Institute AIFB, University of Karlsruhe, 2007 Combined complexity of various DLs 1 1 1 1 3 # Available Reasoners (known to me)
    12. 12. Incremental reasoning is smart (1) Incremental answers is what we expect on the web Standard expectation for query answering on the web
    13. 13. Incremental reasoning is smart (2) <ul><li>Alternate possible interpretations of incremental reasoning </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Maintain state information from previous reasoning cycles when dealing with change to the KB (Pellet interpretation) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Provide answers / results incrementally (anytime behaviour) </li></ul></ul>Incremental reasoning saves work Source: C. Halaschek-Wiener et al. Description Logic Reasoning for Dynamic A-Boxes, 2006 DL Workshop, CEUR WS 189
    14. 14. The ideal Semantic WEB reasoning approach time Quality as a combination of soundness and completness <ul><li>Functional Qualities </li></ul><ul><li>Measurable quality </li></ul><ul><li>Recognizable quality </li></ul><ul><li>Monotonicity </li></ul><ul><li>Consistency </li></ul><ul><li>Diminishing returns </li></ul><ul><li>Interruptability </li></ul><ul><li>Preemtability </li></ul>Source: Shlomo Zilberstein, Using Anytime Algorithms in Intelligent Systems, AI Magazine, Fall 1996 HAPPY TO DISCUSS WITH YOU !!!

    ×