Non-Standard Reasoning Services for the Debugging of Description Logic Terminologies
By Stefan Schlobach, R. Cornet. International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 2003
567 citations recorded by the source corpus.
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4761b82ad16ef8501efe3972c5db67dbf332b5a8
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
- Matthew Horridge
- Sean Bechhofer
- Bijan Parsia
- Aditya Kalyanpur
- Evren Sirin
- Giorgos Flouris
- Dimitris Manakanatas
- Haridimos Kondylakis
Citations in the corpus
- Ontology change: classification and survey (2008, methodology): “…diagnosis and ontology repair , where ontology diagnosis refers to the identification of the possible causes of the logical contradiction(s) and ontology repair refers to the determination of the best way to resolve the logical contradiction(s) (Haase et al. 2005), (Schlobach & Cornet 2003).”
- Finding All Justifications of OWL DL Entailments (2007, background): “[11] formalizes the problem including the specification of terms such as the MUPS (Minimal Unsatisfiability Preserving sub-TBox), which is the justification for the unsatisfiability entailment.”
- The OWL API: A Java API for OWL ontologies (2011, background): “Many of these explanation facilities are based on justifications [2,22,37], which are minimal sets of axioms that are sufficient for an entailment to hold.”