Semantics Of Query Answering Research Articles

Reasoning in inconsistent prioritized knowledge bases: an argumentative approach

<p>A study of query answering in prioritized ontological knowledge bases (KBs) has received attention in recent years. While several semantics of query answering have been proposed and their complexity is rather well-understood, the problem of explaining inconsistency-tolerant query answers has paid less attention. Explaining query answers permits users to understand not only what is entailed or not entailed by an inconsistent DL-LiteR KBs in the presence of priority, but also why. We, therefore, concern with the use of argumentation frameworks to allow users to better understand explanation techniques of querying answers over inconsistent DL-LiteR KBs in the presence of priority. More specifically, we propose a new variant of Dung’s argumentation frameworks, which corresponds to a given inconsistent DL-LiteR KB. We clarify a close relation between preferred subtheories adopted in such prioritized DL-LiteR setting and acceptable semantics of the corresponding argumentation framework. The significant result paves the way for applying algorithms and proof theories to establish preferred subtheories inferences in prioritized DL-LiteR KBs.</p>

Explanations for Inconsistency-Tolerant Query Answering under Existential Rules

Querying inconsistent knowledge bases is a problem that has attracted a great deal of interest over the last decades. While several semantics of query answering have been proposed, and their complexity is rather well-understood, little attention has been paid to the problem of explaining query answers. Explainability has recently become a prominent problem in different areas of AI. In particular, explaining query answers allows users to understand not only what is entailed by an inconsistent knowledge base, but also why. In this paper, we address the problem of explaining query answers for existential rules under three popular inconsistency-tolerant semantics, namely, the ABox repair, the intersection of repairs, and the intersection of closed repairs semantics. We provide a thorough complexity analysis for a wide range of existential rule languages and for different complexity measures.

Incompleteness in information integration

Information integration is becoming a critical problem for both businesses and individuals. The data, especially the one that comes from the Web, is naturally incomplete, that is, some data values may be unknown or lost because of communication problems, hidden due to privacy considerations. At the same time research in (virtual) integration in the community focusses on null-free sources and addresses limited forms of incompleteness only. In our work we aim to extend current results on virtual integration by considering various forms of incompleteness at the level of the sources, the integrated database and the queries (we call this Incomplete Information Integration , or III). More specifically, we aim to extend current query answering techniques for local-, and global-as-view integration to integration of tables with SQL nulls, Codd tables, etc. We also aim to consider incomplete answers as a natural extension of the classical approach. Our main research issues are (i) semantics of III, (ii) semantics of query answering in III, (iii) complexity of query answering, and (iv) algorithms (possibly approximate) to compute the answers.