Concrete domains, especially those that allow to compare features with numeric values, have long been recognized as a very desirable extension of description logics (DLs), and significant efforts have been invested into adding them to usual DLs while keeping the complexity of reasoning in check. For expressive DLs and in the presence of general TBoxes, for standard reasoning tasks like consistency, the most general decidability results are for the so-called $\omega$-admissible domains, which are required to be dense. Supporting non-dense domains for features that range over integers or natural numbers remained largely open, despite often being singled out as a highly desirable extension. The decidability of some extensions of $\mathcal{ALC}$ with non-dense domains has been shown, but existing results rely on powerful machinery that does not allow to infer any elementary bounds on the complexity of the problem. In this paper, we study an extension of $\mathcal{ALC}$ with a rich integer domain that allows for comparisons (between features, and between features and constants coded in unary), and prove that consistency can be solved using automata-theoretic techniques in single exponential time, and thus has no higher worst-case complexity than standard $\mathcal{ALC}$. Our upper bounds apply to some extensions of DLs with concrete domains known from the literature, support general TBoxes, and allow for comparing values along paths of ordinary (not necessarily functional) roles.

In ontology-based data access (OBDA), ontologies have been successfully employed for querying possibly unstructured and incomplete data. In this paper, we advocate using ontologies not only to formulate queries and compute their answers, but also for modifying queries by relaxing or restraining them, so that they can retrieve either more or less answers over a given dataset. Towards this goal, we first illustrate that some domain knowledge that could be naturally leveraged in OBDA can be expressed using complex role inclusions (CRI). Queries over ontologies with CRI are not first-order (FO) rewritable in general. We propose an extension of DL-Lite with CRI, and show that conjunctive queries over ontologies in this extension are FO rewritable. Our main contribution is a set of rules to relax and restrain conjunctive queries (CQs). Firstly, we define rules that use the ontology to produce CQs that are relaxations/restrictions over any dataset. Secondly, we introduce a set of data-driven rules, that leverage patterns in the current dataset, to obtain more fine-grained relaxations and restrictions.

We propose Clopen Knowledge Bases (CKBs) as a new formalism combining Answer Set Programming (ASP) with ontology languages based on first-order logic. CKBs generalize the prominent r-hybrid and DL+LOG languages of Rosati, and are more flexible for specification of problems that combine open-world and closed-world reasoning. We argue that the guarded negation fragment of first-order logic(GNFO)—a very expressive fragment that subsumes many prominent ontology languages like Description Logics (DLs) and the guarded fragment—is an ontology language that can be used in CKBs while enjoying decidability for basic reasoning problems. We further show how CKBs can be used with expressive DLs of the ALC family, and obtain worst-case optimal complexity results in this setting. For DL-based CKBs, we define a fragment called separable CKBs (which still strictly subsumes r-hybrid and DL+LOG knowledge bases), and show that they can be rather efficiently translated into standard ASP programs. This approach allows us to perform basic inference from separable CKBs by reusing existing efficient ASP solvers. We have implemented the approach for separable CKBs containing ontologies in the DL ALCH, and present in this paper some promising empirical results for real-life data. They show that our approach provides a dramatic improvement over a naive implementation based on a translation of such CKBs into dl-programs.

In this paper we consider the setting of graph-structured data that evolves as a result of operations carried out by users or applications. We study different reasoning problems, which range from ensuring the satisfaction of a given set of integrity constraints after a given sequence of updates, to deciding the (non-)existence of a sequence of actions that would take the data to an (un)desirable state, starting either from a specific data instance or from an incomplete description of it. We consider a simple action language in which actions are finite sequences of insertions and deletions of nodes and labels, and use Description Logics for describing integrity constraints and (partial) states of the data. We then formalize the data management problems mentioned above as a static verification problem and several planning problems. We provide algorithms and tight complexity bounds for the formalized problems, both for an expressive DL and for a variant of DL-Lite.

Query answering over Description Logic (DL) ontologies has become a vibrant field of research. Efficient realizations often exploit database technology and rewrite a given query to an equivalent SQL or Datalog query over a database associated with the ontology. This approach has been intensively studied for conjunctive query answering in the DL-Lite and EL families, but is much less explored for more expressive DLs and queries. We present a rewriting-based algorithm for conjunctive query answering over Horn-SHIQ ontologies, possibly extended with recursive rules under limited recursion as in DL+log. This setting not only subsumes both DL-Lite and EL, but also yields an algorithm for answering (limited) recursive queries over Horn-SHIQ ontologies (an undecidable problem for full recursive queries). A prototype implementation shows its potential for applications, as experiments exhibit efficient query answering over full Horn-SHIQ ontologies and benign downscaling to DL-Lite, where it is competitive with comparable state of the art systems.