2008•Unpublished venueRequires access

RIQ and SROIQ are harder than SHOIQ

Yevgeny Kazakov

Open publisher page 107 citations

Abstract

Abstract. We identify the complexity of (finite model) reasoning in the DL SROIQ to be N2ExpTime-complete. We also prove that (finite model) reasoning in the DL SR—a fragment of SROIQ without nominals, number restrictions, and inverse roles—is 2ExpTime-hard. 1 From SHIQ to SROIQ In this paper we study the complexity of reasoning in the DL SROIQ—the logic chosen as a candidate for OWL 2. 1 SROIQ has been introduced in [1] as an extension of SRIQ, which itself was introduced previously in [2] as an extension of RIQ [3]. These papers present tableau-based procedures for the respective DLs and prove their soundness, completeness and termination. In contrast to sub-languages of SHOIQ whose computational complexities are currently well understood [4], almost nothing was known, up until now, about the complexity of SROIQ, SRIQ and RIQ except for the hardness results inherited from their sub-lanbuages: SROIQ is NExpTime-hard as an extension of SHOIQ, SRIQ and RIQ are ExpTime-hard as extensions of SHIQ. The

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Abstract. We identify the complexity of (finite model) reasoning in the DL SROIQ to be N2ExpTime-complete. We also prove that (finite model) reasoning in the DL SR—a fragment of SROIQ without nominals, number restrictions, and inverse roles—is 2ExpTime-hard. 1 From SHIQ to SROIQ In this paper we study the complexity of reasoning in the DL SROIQ—the logic chosen as a candidate for OWL 2. 1 SROIQ has been introduced in [1] as an extension of SRIQ, which itself was introduced previously in [2] as an extension of RIQ [3]. These papers present tableau-based procedures for the respective DLs and prove their soundness, completeness and termination. In contrast to sub-languages of SHOIQ whose computational complexities are currently well understood [4], almost nothing was known, up until now, about the complexity of SROIQ, SRIQ and RIQ except for the hardness results inherited from their sub-lanbuages: SROIQ is NExpTime-hard as an extension of SHOIQ, SRIQ and RIQ are ExpTime-hard as extensions of SHIQ. The

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 107 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Abstract. We identify the complexity of (finite model) reasoning in the DL SROIQ to be N2ExpTime-complete. We also prove that (finite model) reasoning in the DL SR—a fragment of SROIQ without nominals, number restrictions, and inverse roles—is 2ExpTime-hard. 1 From SHIQ to SROIQ In this paper we study the complexity of reasoning in the DL SROIQ—the logic chosen as a candidate for OWL 2. 1 SROIQ has been introduced in [1] as an extension of SRIQ, which itself was introduced previously in [2] as an extension of RIQ [3]. These papers present tableau-based procedures for the respective DLs and prove their soundness, completeness and termination. In contrast to sub-languages of SHOIQ whose computational complexities are currently well understood [4], almost nothing was known, up until now, about the complexity of SROIQ, SRIQ and RIQ except for the hardness results inherited from their sub-lanbuages: SROIQ is NExpTime-hard as an extension of SHOIQ, SRIQ and RIQ are ExpTime-hard as extensions of SHIQ. The

Key concepts: Description logic, Axiom, Web Ontology Language, Computer science, Theoretical computer science, Mathematics, Discrete mathematics, Algorithm

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
RIQ and SROIQ are harder than SHOIQ — Research Paper | ScholarLens