Current techniques for query answering over DL-Lite ontologies have severe limitations in practice, since they either produce complex queries that are inefficient during execution, or require expensive data pre-processing. In light of this, we present two complementary sets of results that aim at improving the overall peformance of query answering systems. We show how to create ABox repositories that are complete w.r.t. a significant portion of DL-Lite TBoxes, but where the data is not explicitly expanded. Second, we show how to characterize ABox completeness by means of dependencies, and how to use these and equivalence to optimize DL-Lite TBoxes. These results allow us to reduce the cost of query rewriting, often dramatically, and to generate highly efficient queries. We have implemented a novel system for query answering over DL-Lite ontologies that incorporates these techniques, and we present a series of data-intensive evaluations that show their effectiveness.

When agents need to make decisions on multiple issues, applying common voting rules becomes computationally hard due to the exponentially large number of alternatives. One computationally efficient solution is to vote on the issues sequentially. In this paper, we investigate how well the winner under the sequential voting process approximates the winners under some common voting rules that admit natural scoring functions that can serve as a basis for approximation results. We focus on multi-issue domains where each issue is binary and the agents' preferences are O-legal, separable, represented by LP-trees, or lexicographic. We show some generalized paradoxes of multiple elections: Sequential voting does not approximate many common voting rules well even when the preferences are O-legal or separable. However, these paradoxes are much alleviated or even completely avoided when the preferences are lexicographic or represented by LP-trees. Our results thus draw a border for conditions under which sequential voting rules, which have extremely low com- putational and communicational cost, are good approximations of some common voting rules w.r.t. their corresponding scoring functions.

The advance of Internet and Sensor technology has brought about new challenges evoked by the emergence of continuous data streams. While existing data-stream management systems allow for high-throughput stream processing, they lack complex reasoning capacities. We address this shortcoming and elaborate upon an approach to knowledge-intense stream reasoning based on Answer Set Programming (ASP). The emphasis thus shifts from rapid data processing to complex reasoning. To accommodate this in ASP, we develop new techniques that allow us to formulate problem encodings dealing with emerging as well as expiring data in a seamless way. We thus propose novel language constructs and modeling techniques for specifying and reasoning with time-decaying logic programs.

We describe the application of assumption-based argumentation (ABA) to a domain of medical knowledge derived from clinical trials of drugs for breast cancer. We adapt an algorithm for calculating the admissible semantics for ABA frameworks to take account of preferences and describe a prototype implementation which uses variant-based parallel computation to improve the efficiency of query answering.

Argumentation is a human-like reasoning mechanism contributing to the formalization of commonsense reasoning. In the last decade, several argument-based formalisms have emerged, with application in many areas, such as legal reasoning, autonomous agents and multi-agent systems; many are based on Dung’s seminal work characterizing Abstract Argumentation Frameworks (AF). Recent research in the area has led to Temporal Argumentation Frameworks (TAF) that extend Dung’s by considering the temporal availability of arguments. In this work we introduce a novel framework, called Extended Temporal Argumentation Framework (E-TAF), extending TAF with the capability of modeling availability of attacks among arguments, which allows for instance to model reliability of arguments varying over time. We show how E-TAF can be enriched by considering Structured Abstract Argumentation, adding compositional elements to the abstract arguments involved based on a simplified version of the recently introduced Dynamic Argumentation Frameworks.

In this paper, we present an alternative to the Turing Test that has some conceptual and practical advantages. A Winograd schema is a pair of sentences that differ only in one or two words and that contain a referential ambiguity that is resolved in opposite directions in the two sentences. We have compiled a collection of Winograd schemas, designed so that the correct answer is obvious to the human reader, but cannot easily be found using selectional restrictions or statistical techniques over text corpora. A contestant in the Winograd Schema Challenge is presented with a collection of one sentence from each pair, and required to achieve human-level accuracy in choosing the correct disambiguation.

We present a conflict-based approach to diagnosing Discrete Event Systems (DES) which generalises Reiter's Diagnose algorithm to a much broader class of problems. This approach obviates the need to explicitly reconstruct the system's behaviors that are consistent with the observation, as is typical of existing DES diagnosis algorithms. Instead, our algorithm explores the space of diagnosis hypotheses, testing hypotheses for consistency, and generating conflicts which rule out successors and other portions of the search space. Under relatively mild assumptions, our algorithm correctly computes the set of preferred diagnosis candidates. We investigate efficient symbolic representations of the hypotheses space and provide a SAT-based implementation of this framework which is used to address a real-world problem in processing alarms for a power transmission system.

Automatically deriving properties of new games is one of the fundamental challenges for general game-playing systems, whose task is to learn to play any previously unknown game solely by being given the rules of that game. A recently developed method uses Answer Set Programming for verifying finitely-bounded temporal invariance properties against a given game description by structural induction. Addressing the new challenge posed by the recent extension of the general Game Description Language to include games with imperfect information and randomness, we extend this method to epistemic properties about games. We formally prove this extension to be correct, and we report on experiments that show its practical applicability.

Standard models of multi-agent modal logic do not capture the fact that information is often ambiguous, and may be interpreted in different ways by different agents. We propose a framework that can model this, and consider different semantics that capture different assumptions about the agents' beliefs regarding whether or not there is ambiguity. We consider the impact of ambiguity on a seminal result in economics: Aumann's result saying that agents with a common prior cannot agree to disagree. This result is known not to hold if agents do not have acommon prior; we show that it also does not hold in the presence of ambiguity. We then consider the tradeoff between assuming a common interpretation (i.e., no ambiguity) and a common prior (i.e., shared initial beliefs).

While query answering in the presence of description logic (DL) ontologies is a well-studied problem, questions of static analysis such as query containment and query optimization have received less attention. In this paper, we study a rather general version of query containment that, unlike the classical version, cannot be reduced to query answering. First, we allow a restriction to be placed on the vocabulary used in the instance data, which can result in shorter equivalent queries; and second, we allow each query its own ontology rather than assuming a single ontology for both queries, which is crucial in applications to versioning and modularity. We also study global minimization of queries in the presence of DL ontologies, which is more subtle than for classical databases as minimal queries need not be isomorphic.