Typology
operator:
and / or
Language
operator:
and / or
Date
operator:
and / or
Rights
operator:
and / or
2022
Book
Open Access
Proceedings of the 20th International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning (NMR 2022)
Arieli O, Casini G, Giordano L
Proceedings of the 20th International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning (NMR2022)Source: CEUR WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS
Arieli O, Casini G, Giordano L
Proceedings of the 20th International Workshop on Non-Monotonic Reasoning (NMR2022)Source: CEUR WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS
See at:
ceur-ws.org 
| CNR IRIS | ISTI Repository | CNR IRIS 
2021
Book
Open Access
Guest editorial Special Issue: Mining and Reasoning with Legal Texts
Robaldo L, Van Der Torre L, Casini G, Villata S
Journal of Applied Logics - IfCoLog Journal, vol. 8 (4). Special Issue: Mining and Reasoning with Legal Texts
Robaldo L, Van Der Torre L, Casini G, Villata S
Journal of Applied Logics - IfCoLog Journal, vol. 8 (4). Special Issue: Mining and Reasoning with Legal Texts
See at:
collegepublications.co.uk | CNR IRIS | ISTI Repository | CNR IRIS
2020
Book
Open Access
Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on MIning and REasoning with Legal texts (MIREL 2019)
Casini G, Di Caro L, Governatori G, Leone V, Markovich R
Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on MIning and REasoning with Legal texts (MIREL 2019), co-located with the 32nd International Conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems (JURIX 2019).Source: CEUR WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS
Casini G, Di Caro L, Governatori G, Leone V, Markovich R
Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on MIning and REasoning with Legal texts (MIREL 2019), co-located with the 32nd International Conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems (JURIX 2019).Source: CEUR WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS
See at:
ceur-ws.org | CNR IRIS | ISTI Repository | CNR IRIS | CNR IRIS
2022
Other
Open Access
A general framework for modelling conditional reasoning - Preliminary report
Casini G, Straccia U
We introduce and investigate here a formalisation for conditionals that allows the definition of a broad class of reasoning systems. This framework covers the most popular kinds of conditional reasoning in logic-based KR: the semantics we propose is appropriate for a structural analysis of those conditionals that do not satisfy closure properties associated to classical logics.Project(s): TAILOR
Casini G, Straccia U
We introduce and investigate here a formalisation for conditionals that allows the definition of a broad class of reasoning systems. This framework covers the most popular kinds of conditional reasoning in logic-based KR: the semantics we propose is appropriate for a structural analysis of those conditionals that do not satisfy closure properties associated to classical logics.Project(s): TAILOR
See at:
arxiv.org | CNR IRIS | ISTI Repository | CNR IRIS
2022
Conference article
Open Access
A general framework for modelling conditional reasoning - Preliminary report
Casini G, Straccia U
We introduce and investigate here a formalisation for conditionals that allows the definition of a broad class of reasoning systems. This framework covers the most popular kinds of conditional reasoning in logic-based KR: the semantics we propose is appropriate for a structural analysis of those conditionals that do not satisfy closure properties associated to classical logics.DOI: 10.24963/kr.2022/12
DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.2202.07596
Project(s): TAILOR
Metrics:
Casini G, Straccia U
We introduce and investigate here a formalisation for conditionals that allows the definition of a broad class of reasoning systems. This framework covers the most popular kinds of conditional reasoning in logic-based KR: the semantics we propose is appropriate for a structural analysis of those conditionals that do not satisfy closure properties associated to classical logics.DOI: 10.24963/kr.2022/12
DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.2202.07596
Project(s): TAILOR
Metrics:
See at:
arXiv.org e-Print Archive | CNR IRIS | ISTI Repository | proceedings.kr.org | doi.org | doi.org | CNR IRIS
2023
Contribution to conference
Open Access
Preface for the first Workshop on AI-driven heterogeneous data management: Completing, merging, handling inconsistencies and query-answering (ENIGMA-2023)
Benferhat S., Casini G., Meyer T., Tettamanzi A. G. B.
Proceedings of 1st Workshop on AI-driven heterogeneous data management: Completing, merging, handling inconsistencies and query-answering, co-located with 20th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 2023).Source: Aachen: CEUR-WS.org, 2023
Benferhat S., Casini G., Meyer T., Tettamanzi A. G. B.
Proceedings of 1st Workshop on AI-driven heterogeneous data management: Completing, merging, handling inconsistencies and query-answering, co-located with 20th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 2023).Source: Aachen: CEUR-WS.org, 2023
See at:
ceur-ws.org | ISTI Repository | CNR ExploRA
2010
Conference article
Restricted
Rational closure for defeasible description logics
Casini G, Straccia U
In the field of non-monotonic logics, the notion of rational closure is acknowledged as a landmark, and we are going to see that such a construction can be characterised by means of a simple method in the context of propositional logic. We then propose an application of our approach to rational closure in the field of Description Logics, an important knowledge representation formalism, and provide a simple decision procedure for this case.DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-15675-5_9
Metrics:
Casini G, Straccia U
In the field of non-monotonic logics, the notion of rational closure is acknowledged as a landmark, and we are going to see that such a construction can be characterised by means of a simple method in the context of propositional logic. We then propose an application of our approach to rational closure in the field of Description Logics, an important knowledge representation formalism, and provide a simple decision procedure for this case.DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-15675-5_9
Metrics:
See at:
doi.org | CNR IRIS | CNR IRIS | link.springer.com
2022
Conference article
Open Access
A rational entailment for expressive description logics via description logic programs
Casini G, Straccia U
Lehmann and Magidor's rational closure is acknowledged as a land-mark in the field of non-monotonic logics and it has also been re-formulated in the context ofDescription Logics (DLs). We show here how to model a rational form of entailment for expressive DLs, such as SROIQ, providing a novel reasoning procedure that compiles a non-monotone DL knowledge base into a description logic program(dl-program).Source: COMMUNICATIONS IN COMPUTER AND INFORMATION SCIENCE (PRINT), pp. 177-191. Durban, South Africa, 6-10/12/2021
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-95070-5_12
Metrics:
Casini G, Straccia U
Lehmann and Magidor's rational closure is acknowledged as a land-mark in the field of non-monotonic logics and it has also been re-formulated in the context ofDescription Logics (DLs). We show here how to model a rational form of entailment for expressive DLs, such as SROIQ, providing a novel reasoning procedure that compiles a non-monotone DL knowledge base into a description logic program(dl-program).Source: COMMUNICATIONS IN COMPUTER AND INFORMATION SCIENCE (PRINT), pp. 177-191. Durban, South Africa, 6-10/12/2021
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-95070-5_12
Metrics:
See at:
CNR IRIS | link.springer.com | ISTI Repository | CNR IRIS | CNR IRIS
2021
Other
Open Access
A rational entailment for expressive description logics via description logic programs
Casini G, Straccia U
Lehmann and Magidor's rational closure is acknowledged as a landmark in the field of non-monotonic logics and it has also been re-formulated in the context of Description Logics (DLs). We show here how to model a rational form of entailment for expressive DLs, such as SROIQ, providing a novel reasoning procedure that compiles a nonmonotone DL knowledge base into a description logic program (dl-program).DOI: 10.32079/isti-tr-2021/019
Metrics:
Casini G, Straccia U
Lehmann and Magidor's rational closure is acknowledged as a landmark in the field of non-monotonic logics and it has also been re-formulated in the context of Description Logics (DLs). We show here how to model a rational form of entailment for expressive DLs, such as SROIQ, providing a novel reasoning procedure that compiles a nonmonotone DL knowledge base into a description logic program (dl-program).DOI: 10.32079/isti-tr-2021/019
Metrics:
See at:
CNR IRIS | ISTI Repository | CNR IRIS
2021
Conference article
Open Access
Contextual conditional reasoning
Casini G, Meyer T, Varzinczak I
We extend the expressivity of classical conditional reasoning by introducing context as a new parameter. The enriched conditional logic generalises the defeasible conditional setting in the style of Kraus, Lehmann, and Magidor, and allows for a refined semantics that is able to distinguish, for example, between expectations and counterfactuals. In this paper we introduce the language for the enriched logic and define an appropriate semantic framework for it. We analyse which properties generally associated with conditional reasoning are still satisfied by the new semantic framework, provide a suitable representation result, and define an entailment relation based on Lehmann and Magidor's generally-accepted notion of Rational Closure.Source: PROCEEDINGS OF THE ... AAAI CONFERENCE ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, pp. 6254-6261. Online Conference, 2-9/2/2021
Casini G, Meyer T, Varzinczak I
We extend the expressivity of classical conditional reasoning by introducing context as a new parameter. The enriched conditional logic generalises the defeasible conditional setting in the style of Kraus, Lehmann, and Magidor, and allows for a refined semantics that is able to distinguish, for example, between expectations and counterfactuals. In this paper we introduce the language for the enriched logic and define an appropriate semantic framework for it. We analyse which properties generally associated with conditional reasoning are still satisfied by the new semantic framework, provide a suitable representation result, and define an entailment relation based on Lehmann and Magidor's generally-accepted notion of Rational Closure.Source: PROCEEDINGS OF THE ... AAAI CONFERENCE ON ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, pp. 6254-6261. Online Conference, 2-9/2/2021
See at:
CNR IRIS | ojs.aaai.org | ISTI Repository | CNR IRIS
2021
Conference article
Open Access
KLM-style defeasibility for restricted first-order logic
Casini G, Meyer T, Patersonjones G
We extend the KLM approach to defeasible reasoning to be applicable to a restricted version of first-order logic. We describe defeasibility for this logic using a set of rationality postulates, provide an appropriate semantics for it, and present a representation result that characterises the semantic description of defeasibility in terms of the rationality postulates. Based on this theoretical core, we then propose a version of defeasible entailment that is inspired by Rational Closure as it is defined for defeasible propositional logic and defeasible description logics. We show that this form of defeasible entailment is rational in the sense that it adheres to our rationality postulates. The work in this paper is the first step towards our ultimate goal of introducing KLM-style defeasible reasoning into the family of Datalog+/- ontology languages.
Casini G, Meyer T, Patersonjones G
We extend the KLM approach to defeasible reasoning to be applicable to a restricted version of first-order logic. We describe defeasibility for this logic using a set of rationality postulates, provide an appropriate semantics for it, and present a representation result that characterises the semantic description of defeasibility in terms of the rationality postulates. Based on this theoretical core, we then propose a version of defeasible entailment that is inspired by Rational Closure as it is defined for defeasible propositional logic and defeasible description logics. We show that this form of defeasible entailment is rational in the sense that it adheres to our rationality postulates. The work in this paper is the first step towards our ultimate goal of introducing KLM-style defeasible reasoning into the family of Datalog+/- ontology languages.
See at:
drive.google.com | CNR IRIS | ISTI Repository | CNR IRIS
2022
Conference article
Open Access
Situated conditionals - A brief introduction
Casini G, Meyer T, Varzinczak I
We extend the expressivity of classical conditional reasoning by introducing situation as a new parameter. The enriched conditional logic generalises the defeasible conditional setting in the style of Kraus, Lehmann, and Magidor, and allows for a refined semantics that is able to distinguish, for example, between expectations and counterfactuals. We introduce the language for the enriched logic and define an appropriate semantic framework for it. We analyse which properties generally associated with conditional reasoning are still satisfied by the new semantic framework, provide a suitable representation result, and define an entailment relation based on Lehmann and Magidor's generally-accepted notion of RationalClosure.Source: CEUR WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS, pp. 151-154. Haifa, Israel, 07-09/08/2022
Project(s): TAILOR
Casini G, Meyer T, Varzinczak I
We extend the expressivity of classical conditional reasoning by introducing situation as a new parameter. The enriched conditional logic generalises the defeasible conditional setting in the style of Kraus, Lehmann, and Magidor, and allows for a refined semantics that is able to distinguish, for example, between expectations and counterfactuals. We introduce the language for the enriched logic and define an appropriate semantic framework for it. We analyse which properties generally associated with conditional reasoning are still satisfied by the new semantic framework, provide a suitable representation result, and define an entailment relation based on Lehmann and Magidor's generally-accepted notion of RationalClosure.Source: CEUR WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS, pp. 151-154. Haifa, Israel, 07-09/08/2022
Project(s): TAILOR
See at:
ceur-ws.org | CNR IRIS | ISTI Repository | CNR IRIS
2022
Conference article
Open Access
Defeasible reasoning in RDFS
Casini G, Straccia U
For non-monotonic logics, the notion of Rational Closure (RC) is acknowledged as one of the main approaches. In this work we present an integration of RC within the triple language RDFS (Resource Description Framework Schema), which together with OWL 2 is a major standard semantic web ontology language. To do so, we start from ?df, an RDFS fragment that covers the essential features of RDFS, and extend it to ?df?, allowing to state that two entities are incompatible/disjoint with each other. Eventually, we propose defeasible ?df? via a typical RC construction allowing to state default class/property inclusions.Source: CEUR WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS, vol. 3197, pp. 155-158. Haifa, Israel, 07-09/08/2022
Project(s): TAILOR
Casini G, Straccia U
For non-monotonic logics, the notion of Rational Closure (RC) is acknowledged as one of the main approaches. In this work we present an integration of RC within the triple language RDFS (Resource Description Framework Schema), which together with OWL 2 is a major standard semantic web ontology language. To do so, we start from ?df, an RDFS fragment that covers the essential features of RDFS, and extend it to ?df?, allowing to state that two entities are incompatible/disjoint with each other. Eventually, we propose defeasible ?df? via a typical RC construction allowing to state default class/property inclusions.Source: CEUR WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS, vol. 3197, pp. 155-158. Haifa, Israel, 07-09/08/2022
Project(s): TAILOR
See at:
ceur-ws.org | CNR IRIS | ISTI Repository | CNR IRIS
2024
Conference article
Open Access
Defeasible justification for KLM-style logic
Chama V., Wang S., Meyer T., Casini G.
Research in description logics (DLs) and formal ontologies has dedicated quite an effort to the investigation of the notion of explanation for DL reasoning, for example relying on the notion of justification [1]. There has also been some effort dedicated to the definition of defeasible reasoning for DLs that, contrary to the classical monotonic reasoning, is appropriate for dealing with incomplete/uncertain information. In the present paper, we extend the notion of justification to the framework of defeasible reasoning for DLs; specifically, we consider rational closure [2], an entailment relation that is of particular importance in the area of defeasible reasoning. Here we present the main theoretical results for the DL ALC, and an implementation of our solution, at the moment developed for propositional logic.Source: CEUR WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS, vol. 3739. Bergen, Norway, 18-21/06/2024
Project(s): STARWARS
Chama V., Wang S., Meyer T., Casini G.
Research in description logics (DLs) and formal ontologies has dedicated quite an effort to the investigation of the notion of explanation for DL reasoning, for example relying on the notion of justification [1]. There has also been some effort dedicated to the definition of defeasible reasoning for DLs that, contrary to the classical monotonic reasoning, is appropriate for dealing with incomplete/uncertain information. In the present paper, we extend the notion of justification to the framework of defeasible reasoning for DLs; specifically, we consider rational closure [2], an entailment relation that is of particular importance in the area of defeasible reasoning. Here we present the main theoretical results for the DL ALC, and an implementation of our solution, at the moment developed for propositional logic.Source: CEUR WORKSHOP PROCEEDINGS, vol. 3739. Bergen, Norway, 18-21/06/2024
Project(s): STARWARS
See at:
ceur-ws.org | CNR IRIS | CNR IRIS
2020
Conference article
Open Access
BKLM - An expressive logic for defeasible reasoning
Patersonjones G, Casini G, Meyer T
Propositional KLM-style defeasible reasoning involves a core propositional logic capable of expressing defeasible (or conditional) implications. The semantics for this logic is based on Kripke-like structures known as ranked interpretations. KLM-style defeasible entailment is referred to as rational whenever the defeasible entailment relation under consideration generates a set of defeasible implications all satisfying a set of rationality postulates known as the KLM postulates. In a recent paper Booth et al. proposed PTL, a logic that is more expressive than the core KLM logic. They proved an impossibility result, showing that defeasible entailment for PTL fails to satisfy a set of rationality postulates similar in spirit to the KLM postulates. Their interpretation of the impossibility result is that defeasible entailment for PTL need not be unique. In this paper we continue the line of research in which the expressivity of the core KLM logic is extended. We present the logic Boolean KLM (BKLM) in which we allow for disjunctions, conjunctions, and negations, but not nesting, of defeasible implications. Our contribution is twofold. Firstly, we show (perhaps surprisingly) that BKLM is more expressive than PTL. Our proof is based on the fact that BKLM can characterise all single ranked interpretations, whereas PTL cannot. Secondly, given that the PTL impossibility result also applies to BKLM, we adapt the different forms of PTL entailment proposed by Booth et al. to apply to BKLM.
Patersonjones G, Casini G, Meyer T
Propositional KLM-style defeasible reasoning involves a core propositional logic capable of expressing defeasible (or conditional) implications. The semantics for this logic is based on Kripke-like structures known as ranked interpretations. KLM-style defeasible entailment is referred to as rational whenever the defeasible entailment relation under consideration generates a set of defeasible implications all satisfying a set of rationality postulates known as the KLM postulates. In a recent paper Booth et al. proposed PTL, a logic that is more expressive than the core KLM logic. They proved an impossibility result, showing that defeasible entailment for PTL fails to satisfy a set of rationality postulates similar in spirit to the KLM postulates. Their interpretation of the impossibility result is that defeasible entailment for PTL need not be unique. In this paper we continue the line of research in which the expressivity of the core KLM logic is extended. We present the logic Boolean KLM (BKLM) in which we allow for disjunctions, conjunctions, and negations, but not nesting, of defeasible implications. Our contribution is twofold. Firstly, we show (perhaps surprisingly) that BKLM is more expressive than PTL. Our proof is based on the fact that BKLM can characterise all single ranked interpretations, whereas PTL cannot. Secondly, given that the PTL impossibility result also applies to BKLM, we adapt the different forms of PTL entailment proposed by Booth et al. to apply to BKLM.
See at:
CNR IRIS | nmr2020.dc.uba.ar | ISTI Repository | CNR IRIS
2020
Conference article
Open Access
Rational defeasible belief change
Casini G, Meyer T, Varzinczak I
We present a formal framework for modelling belief change within a nonmonotonic reasoning system. Belief change and non-monotonic reasoning are two areas that are formally closely related, with recent attention being paid towards the analysis of belief change within a non-monotonic environment. In this paper we consider the classical AGM belief change operators, contraction and revision, applied to a defeasible setting in the style of Kraus, Lehmann, and Magidor. The investigation leads us to the consideration of the problem of iterated change, generalising the classical work of Darwiche and Pearl. We characterise a family of operators for iterated revision, followed by an analogous characterisation of operators for iterated contraction. We start considering belief change operators aimed at preserving logical consistency, and then characterise analogous operators aimed at the preservation of coherence--an important notion within the field of logic-based ontologies.Source: PROCEEDINGS INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON PRINCIPLES OF KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION AND REASONING, pp. 213-222. Online conference, 12-18/09/2020
DOI: 10.24963/kr.2020/22
Metrics:
Casini G, Meyer T, Varzinczak I
We present a formal framework for modelling belief change within a nonmonotonic reasoning system. Belief change and non-monotonic reasoning are two areas that are formally closely related, with recent attention being paid towards the analysis of belief change within a non-monotonic environment. In this paper we consider the classical AGM belief change operators, contraction and revision, applied to a defeasible setting in the style of Kraus, Lehmann, and Magidor. The investigation leads us to the consideration of the problem of iterated change, generalising the classical work of Darwiche and Pearl. We characterise a family of operators for iterated revision, followed by an analogous characterisation of operators for iterated contraction. We start considering belief change operators aimed at preserving logical consistency, and then characterise analogous operators aimed at the preservation of coherence--an important notion within the field of logic-based ontologies.Source: PROCEEDINGS INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON PRINCIPLES OF KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION AND REASONING, pp. 213-222. Online conference, 12-18/09/2020
DOI: 10.24963/kr.2020/22
Metrics:
See at:
CNR IRIS | library.confdna.com | ISTI Repository | doi.org | CNR IRIS | www.scopus.com
2021
Other
Open Access
Situated conditional reasoning
Casini G, Meyer T, Varzinczak I
Conditionals are useful for modelling, but aren't always sufficiently expressive for capturing information accurately. In this paper we make the case for a form of conditional that is situation-based. These conditionals are more expressive than classical conditionals, are general enough to be used in several application domains, and are able to distinguish, for example, between expectations and counterfactuals. Formally, they are shown to generalise the conditional setting in the style of Kraus, Lehmann, and Magidor. We show that situation-based conditionals can be described in terms of a set of rationality postulates. We then propose an intuitive semantics for these conditionals, and present a representation result which shows that our semantic construction corresponds exactly to the description in terms of postulates. With the semantics in place, we proceed to define a form of entailment for situated conditional knowledge bases, which we refer to as minimal closure. It is reminiscent of and, indeed, inspired by, the version of entailment for propositional conditional knowledge bases known as rational closure. Finally, we proceed to show that it is possible to reduce the computation of minimal closure to a series of propositional entailment and satisfiability checks. While this is also the case for rational closure, it is somewhat surprising that the result carries over to minimal closure.DOI: 10.32079/isti-tr-2021/009
Metrics:
Casini G, Meyer T, Varzinczak I
Conditionals are useful for modelling, but aren't always sufficiently expressive for capturing information accurately. In this paper we make the case for a form of conditional that is situation-based. These conditionals are more expressive than classical conditionals, are general enough to be used in several application domains, and are able to distinguish, for example, between expectations and counterfactuals. Formally, they are shown to generalise the conditional setting in the style of Kraus, Lehmann, and Magidor. We show that situation-based conditionals can be described in terms of a set of rationality postulates. We then propose an intuitive semantics for these conditionals, and present a representation result which shows that our semantic construction corresponds exactly to the description in terms of postulates. With the semantics in place, we proceed to define a form of entailment for situated conditional knowledge bases, which we refer to as minimal closure. It is reminiscent of and, indeed, inspired by, the version of entailment for propositional conditional knowledge bases known as rational closure. Finally, we proceed to show that it is possible to reduce the computation of minimal closure to a series of propositional entailment and satisfiability checks. While this is also the case for rational closure, it is somewhat surprising that the result carries over to minimal closure.DOI: 10.32079/isti-tr-2021/009
Metrics:
See at:
CNR IRIS | ISTI Repository | CNR IRIS
2021
Other
Open Access
InfraScience Research Activity Report 2020
Artini M, Assante M, Atzori C, Baglioni M, Bardi A, Candela L, Casini G, Castelli D, Cirillo R, Coro G, Debole F, Dell'Amico A, Frosini L, La Bruzzo S, Lazzeri E, Lelii L, Manghi P, Mangiacrapa F, Mannocci A, Pagano P, Panichi G, Piccioli T, Sinibaldi F, Straccia U
InfraScience is a research group of the National Research Council of Italy - Institute of Information Science and Technologies (CNR - ISTI) based in Pisa, Italy. This report documents the research activity performed by this group in 2020 to highlight the major results. In particular, the InfraScience group confronted with research challenges characterising Data Infrastructures, e\-Sci\-ence, and Intelligent Systems. The group activity is pursued by closely connecting research and development and by promoting and supporting open science. In fact, the group is leading the development of two large scale infrastructures for Open Science, \ie D4Science and OpenAIRE. During 2020 InfraScience members contributed to the publishing of 30 papers, to the research and development activities of 12 research projects (11 funded by EU), to the organization of conferences and training events, to several working groups and task forces.DOI: 10.32079/isti-ar-2021/002
Project(s): ARIADNEplus, Blue Cloud , PerformFISH , EOSC-Pillar , DESIRA , EOSCsecretariat.eu , RISIS 2 , TAILOR , I-GENE , MOVING , OpenAIRE-Advance , SoBigData-PlusPlus
Metrics:
Artini M, Assante M, Atzori C, Baglioni M, Bardi A, Candela L, Casini G, Castelli D, Cirillo R, Coro G, Debole F, Dell'Amico A, Frosini L, La Bruzzo S, Lazzeri E, Lelii L, Manghi P, Mangiacrapa F, Mannocci A, Pagano P, Panichi G, Piccioli T, Sinibaldi F, Straccia U
InfraScience is a research group of the National Research Council of Italy - Institute of Information Science and Technologies (CNR - ISTI) based in Pisa, Italy. This report documents the research activity performed by this group in 2020 to highlight the major results. In particular, the InfraScience group confronted with research challenges characterising Data Infrastructures, e\-Sci\-ence, and Intelligent Systems. The group activity is pursued by closely connecting research and development and by promoting and supporting open science. In fact, the group is leading the development of two large scale infrastructures for Open Science, \ie D4Science and OpenAIRE. During 2020 InfraScience members contributed to the publishing of 30 papers, to the research and development activities of 12 research projects (11 funded by EU), to the organization of conferences and training events, to several working groups and task forces.DOI: 10.32079/isti-ar-2021/002
Project(s): ARIADNEplus
, Blue Cloud , PerformFISH , EOSC-Pillar , DESIRA , EOSCsecretariat.eu , RISIS 2 , TAILOR , I-GENE , MOVING , OpenAIRE-Advance , SoBigData-PlusPlus Metrics:
See at:
CNR IRIS | ISTI Repository | CNR IRIS
2022
Other
Open Access
A minimal deductive system for RDFS with negative statements
Straccia U, Casini G
The triple language RDFS is designed to represent and reason with \emph{positive} statements only (e.g."antipyretics are drugs"). In this paper we show how to extend RDFS to express and reason with various forms of negative statements under the Open World Assumption (OWA). To do so, we start from rdf, a minimal, but significant RDFS fragment that covers all essential features of RDFS, and then extend it to ?rdfbotneg, allowing express also statements such as "radio therapies are non drug treatments", "Ebola has no treatment", or "opioids and antipyretics are disjoint classes". The main and, to the best of our knowledge, unique features of our proposal are: (i) rdfbotneg remains syntactically a triple language by extending rdf with new symbols with specific semantics and there is no need to revert to the reification method to represent negative triples; (ii) the logic is defined in such a way that any RDFS reasoner/store may handle the new predicates as ordinary terms if it does not want to take account of the extra capabilities; (iii) despite negated statements, every rdfbotneg knowledge base is satisfiable; (iv) the rdfbotneg entailment decision procedure is obtained from rdf via additional inference rules favouring a potential implementation; and (v) deciding entailment in rdfbotneg ranges from P to NP.Project(s): TAILOR
Straccia U, Casini G
The triple language RDFS is designed to represent and reason with \emph{positive} statements only (e.g."antipyretics are drugs"). In this paper we show how to extend RDFS to express and reason with various forms of negative statements under the Open World Assumption (OWA). To do so, we start from rdf, a minimal, but significant RDFS fragment that covers all essential features of RDFS, and then extend it to ?rdfbotneg, allowing express also statements such as "radio therapies are non drug treatments", "Ebola has no treatment", or "opioids and antipyretics are disjoint classes". The main and, to the best of our knowledge, unique features of our proposal are: (i) rdfbotneg remains syntactically a triple language by extending rdf with new symbols with specific semantics and there is no need to revert to the reification method to represent negative triples; (ii) the logic is defined in such a way that any RDFS reasoner/store may handle the new predicates as ordinary terms if it does not want to take account of the extra capabilities; (iii) despite negated statements, every rdfbotneg knowledge base is satisfiable; (iv) the rdfbotneg entailment decision procedure is obtained from rdf via additional inference rules favouring a potential implementation; and (v) deciding entailment in rdfbotneg ranges from P to NP.Project(s): TAILOR
See at:
arxiv.org | CNR IRIS | ISTI Repository | CNR IRIS
2022
Conference article
Open Access
A minimal deductive system for RDFS with negative statements
Straccia U., Casini G.
The triple language RDFS is designed to represent and reason with \emph{positive} statements only (e.g."antipyretics are drugs"). In this paper we show how to extend RDFS to express and reason with various forms of negative statements under the Open World Assumption (OWA). To do so, we start from rdf, a minimal, but significant RDFS fragment that covers all essential features of RDFS, and then extend it to ?rdfbotneg, allowing express also statements such as "radio therapies are non drug treatments", "Ebola has no treatment", or "opioids and antipyretics are disjoint classes". The main and, to the best of our knowledge, unique features of our proposal are: (i) rdfbotneg remains syntactically a triple language by extending rdf with new symbols with specific semantics and there is no need to revert to the reification method to represent negative triples; (ii) the logic is defined in such a way that any RDFS reasoner/store may handle the new predicates as ordinary terms if it does not want to take account of the extra capabilities; (iii) despite negated statements, every rdfbotneg knowledge base is satisfiable; (iv) the rdfbotneg entailment decision procedure is obtained from rdf via additional inference rules favouring a potential implementation; and (v) deciding entailment in rdfbotneg ranges from P to NP.Source: PROCEEDINGS-INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON PRINCIPLES OF KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION AND REASONING, pp. 351-361. Haifa, Israel, 31/07-05/08/2022
DOI: 10.24963/kr.2022/35
DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.2202.13750
Project(s): TAILOR
Metrics:
Straccia U., Casini G.
The triple language RDFS is designed to represent and reason with \emph{positive} statements only (e.g."antipyretics are drugs"). In this paper we show how to extend RDFS to express and reason with various forms of negative statements under the Open World Assumption (OWA). To do so, we start from rdf, a minimal, but significant RDFS fragment that covers all essential features of RDFS, and then extend it to ?rdfbotneg, allowing express also statements such as "radio therapies are non drug treatments", "Ebola has no treatment", or "opioids and antipyretics are disjoint classes". The main and, to the best of our knowledge, unique features of our proposal are: (i) rdfbotneg remains syntactically a triple language by extending rdf with new symbols with specific semantics and there is no need to revert to the reification method to represent negative triples; (ii) the logic is defined in such a way that any RDFS reasoner/store may handle the new predicates as ordinary terms if it does not want to take account of the extra capabilities; (iii) despite negated statements, every rdfbotneg knowledge base is satisfiable; (iv) the rdfbotneg entailment decision procedure is obtained from rdf via additional inference rules favouring a potential implementation; and (v) deciding entailment in rdfbotneg ranges from P to NP.Source: PROCEEDINGS-INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON PRINCIPLES OF KNOWLEDGE REPRESENTATION AND REASONING, pp. 351-361. Haifa, Israel, 31/07-05/08/2022
DOI: 10.24963/kr.2022/35
DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.2202.13750
Project(s): TAILOR
Metrics:
See at:
arXiv.org e-Print Archive | CNR IRIS | ISTI Repository | proceedings.kr.org | doi.org | doi.org | CNR IRIS