Implementing some sort of nonmonotonicity in SWRL

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Implementing some sort of nonmonotonicity in SWRL

Suman Roy
We would like to handle some kind of non-monotonic inference in SWRL. It is well-known that SWRL supports monotonic inference only. In such a scenario, can we use some trick to retract or modify some already existing information?
 
Here is the example.
 
isInsurable(?d, true) ß Driver(?d), has Age(?d, ?age), swrlb:greaterThan(?d,?age);
noninsured(?d) ß isInsurable(?d, false), Driver(?d);
guaranter(?p) ß applyforLoan(?d,?x), affordMoney(?p,?x), noninsured(?d).
 
Most of these rules are self-explanatory. The third rule says that a noninsured person seeking loan needs to have a guaranter who can afford to pay the loan amount.
 
We assume the dtp isInsurable(?d,false) is by default, true. The input might come in form of an individual driver and his age may or may not be supplied.
 
The problem is that the first rule will add the value of true to the insurable property for all drivers that satisfy the antecedent. However, by default the following holds, isInsurable(?d,false). This will result in the dtp having two values. As we assume “isInsurable” is functional an OWL reasoner will indicate inconsistency.
 
Can somebody please suggest how to circumvent this problem, and in the process achieve the desired objective?
 
Regards,
--Suman
 
=========================
Suman Roy, Ph.D.
SETLABS, Bldg.-19
Infosys Technologies Ltd.,
# 44 Electronics City, Hosur Road,
Bangalore 560 100, India.
Tel. +91 80 2852 0261 x 50850
     +91 80 4116 3850 (D)
     +91 80 2351 2373 (R)
     +91 98860 23203 (M)
Fax. +91 80 2852 0362
       [hidden email]
 
 
 
**************** CAUTION - Disclaimer *****************
This e-mail contains PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION intended solely 
for the use of the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please 
notify the sender by e-mail and delete the original message. Further, you are not 
to copy, disclose, or distribute this e-mail or its contents to any other person and 
any such actions are unlawful. This e-mail may contain viruses. Infosys has taken 
every reasonable precaution to minimize this risk, but is not liable for any damage 
you may sustain as a result of any virus in this e-mail. You should carry out your 
own virus checks before opening the e-mail or attachment. Infosys reserves the 
right to monitor and review the content of all messages sent to or from this e-mail 
address. Messages sent to or from this e-mail address may be stored on the 
Infosys e-mail system.
***INFOSYS******** End of Disclaimer ********INFOSYS***

_______________________________________________
protege-owl mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl

Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Implementing some sort of nonmonotonicity in SWRL

Thomas Russ

On Feb 9, 2011, at 10:25 PM, Suman Roy wrote:

> We would like to handle some kind of non-monotonic inference in  
> SWRL. It is well-known that SWRL supports monotonic inference only.  
> In such a scenario, can we use some trick to retract or modify some  
> already existing information?

You will either need to use a different technology entirely, or you  
will need to write your own reasoning engine to process this type of  
information.  OWL and SWRL are not designed to support non-monotonic  
or default inference.

>
> Can somebody please suggest how to circumvent this problem, and in  
> the process achieve the desired objective?

I think you would have to implement your business logic in your own,  
custom written code.  You could store basic information in OWL and use  
that as a repository, but any handling of retraction or default style  
reasoning will be in a program that you write yourself.

_______________________________________________
protege-owl mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/protege-owl

Instructions for unsubscribing: http://protege.stanford.edu/doc/faq.html#01a.03