We introduce the notion of contrastive ABox explanations to answer questions of the type "Why is a an instance of C, but b is not?". While there are various approaches for explaining positive entailments (why is C(a) entailed by the knowledge base) as well as missing entailments (why is C(b) not entailed) in isolation, contrastive explanations consider both at the same time, which allows them to focus on the relevant commonalities and differences between a and b. We develop an appropriate notion of contrastive explanations for the special case of ABox reasoning with description logic ontologies, and analyze the computational complexity for different variants under different optimality criteria, considering lightweight as well as more expressive description logics. We implemented a first method for computing one variant of contrastive explanations, and evaluated it on generated problems for realistic knowledge bases.

We study a fitting problem inspired by ontology-mediated querying: given a collection of positive and negative examples of the form $(\mathcal{A},q)$ with $\mathcal{A}$ an ABox and $q$ a Boolean query, we seek an ontology $\mathcal{O}$ that satisfies $\mathcal{A} \cup \mathcal{O} \vDash q$ for all positive examples and $\mathcal{A} \cup \mathcal{O}\not\vDash q$ for all negative examples. We consider the description logics $\mathcal{ALC}$ and $\mathcal{ALCI}$ as ontology languages and a range of query languages that includes atomic queries (AQs), conjunctive queries (CQs), and unions thereof (UCQs). For all of the resulting fitting problems, we provide effective characterizations and determine the computational complexity of deciding whether a fitting ontology exists. This problem turns out to be ${\scriptsize CO}NP$ for AQs and full CQs and $2E{\scriptsize XP}T{\scriptsize IME}$-complete for CQs and UCQs. These results hold for both $\mathcal{ALC}$ and $\mathcal{ALCI}$.

We investigate the data complexity of the satisfiability problem for the very expressive description logic ZOIQ (a.k.a. ALCHb Self reg OIQ) over quasi-forests and establish its NP-completeness. This completes the data complexity landscape for decidable fragments of ZOIQ, and reproves known results on decidable fragments of OWL2 (SR family). Using the same technique, we establish coNEXPTIME-completeness (w.r.t. the combined complexity) of the entailment problem of rooted queries in ZIQ.

SPARQL CONSTRUCT queries allow for the specification of data processing pipelines that transform given input graphs into new output graphs. It is now common to constrain graphs through SHACL shapes allowing users to understand which data they can expect and which not. However, it becomes challenging to understand what graph data can be expected at the end of a data processing pipeline without knowing the particular input data: Shape constraints on the input graph may affect the output graph, but may no longer apply literally, and new shapes may be imposed by the query template. In this paper, we study the derivation of shape constraints that hold on all possible output graphs of a given SPARQL CONSTRUCT query. We assume that the SPARQL CONSTRUCT query is fixed, e.g., being part of a program, whereas the input graphs adhere to input shape constraints but may otherwise vary over time and, thus, are mostly unknown. We study a fragment of SPARQL CONSTRUCT queries (SCCQ) and a fragment of SHACL (Simple SHACL). We formally define the problem of deriving the most restrictive set of Simple SHACL shapes that constrain the results from evaluating a SCCQ over any input graph restricted by a given set of Simple SHACL shapes. We propose and implement an algorithm that statically analyses input SHACL shapes and CONSTRUCT queries and prove its soundness and complexity.

We propose a logic of east and west (LEW ) for points in 1D Euclidean space. It formalises primitive direction relations: east (E), west (W) and indeterminate east/west (Iew). It has a parameter τ ∈ N>1, which is referred to as the level of indeterminacy in directions. For every τ ∈ N>1, we provide a sound and complete axiomatisation of LEW , and prove that its satisfiability problem is NP-complete. In addition, we show that the finite axiomatisability of LEW depends on τ : if τ = 2 or τ = 3, then there exists a finite sound and complete axiomatisation; if τ > 3, then the logic is not finitely axiomatisable. LEW can be easily extended to higher-dimensional Euclidean spaces. Extending LEW to 2D Euclidean space makes it suitable for reasoning about not perfectly aligned representations of the same spatial objects in different datasets, for example, in crowd-sourced digital maps.

In the search for knowledge graph embeddings that could capture ontological knowledge, geometric models of existential rules have been recently introduced. It has been shown that convex geometric regions capture the so-called quasi-chained rules. Attributed description logics (DL) have been defined to bridge the gap between DL languages and knowledge graphs, whose facts often come with various kinds of annotations that may need to be taken into account for reasoning. In particular, temporally attributed DLs are enriched by specific attributes whose semantics allows for some temporal reasoning. Considering that geometric models and (temporally) attributed DLs are promising tools designed for knowledge graphs, this paper investigates their compatibility, focusing on the attributed version of a Horn dialect of the DL-Lite family. We first adapt the definition of geometric models to attributed DLs and show that every satisfiable ontology has a convex geometric model. Our second contribution is a study of the impact of temporal attributes. We show that a temporally attributed DL may not have a convex geometric model in general but we can recover geometric satisfiability by imposing some restrictions on the use of the temporal attributes.

Given a knowledge base and an observation as a set of facts, ABox abduction aims at computing a hypothesis that, when added to the knowledge base, is sufficient to entail the observation. In signature-based ABox abduction, the hypothesis is further required to use only names from a given set. This form of abduction has applications such as diagnosis, KB repair, or explaining missing entailments. It is possible that hypotheses for a given observation only exist if we admit the use of fresh individuals and/or complex concepts built from the given signature, something most approaches for ABox abduction so far do not support or only support with restrictions. In this paper, we investigate the computational complexity of this form of abduction -- allowing either fresh individuals, complex concepts, or both -- for various description logics, and give size bounds on the hypotheses if they exist.

Signature-based abduction aims at building hypotheses over a specified set of names, the signature, that explain an observation relative to some background knowledge. This type of abduction is useful for tasks such as diagnosis, where the vocabulary used for observed symptoms differs from the vocabulary expected to explain those symptoms. We present the first complete method solving signature-based abduction for observations expressed in the expressive description logic ALC, which can include TBox and ABox axioms, thereby solving the knowledge base abduction problem. The method is guaranteed to compute a finite and complete set of hypotheses, and is evaluated on a set of realistic knowledge bases.

We address the problem of handling provenance information in ELHr ontologies. We consider a setting recently introduced for ontology-based data access, based on semirings and extending classical data provenance, in which ontology axioms are annotated with provenance tokens. A consequence inherits the provenance of the axioms involved in deriving it, yielding a provenance polynomial as an annotation. We analyse the semantics for the ELHr case and show that the presence of conjunctions poses various difficulties for handling provenance, some of which are mitigated by assuming multiplicative idempotency of the semiring. Under this assumption, we study three problems: ontology completion with provenance, computing the set of relevant axioms for a consequence, and query answering.

We analyze the data complexity of ontology-mediated querying where the ontologies are formulated in a description logic (DL) of the ALC family and queries are conjunctive queries, positive existential queries, or acyclic conjunctive queries. Our approach is non-uniform in the sense that we aim to understand the complexity of each single ontology instead of for all ontologies formulated in a certain language. While doing so, we quantify over the queries and are interested, for example, in the question whether all queries can be evaluated in polynomial time w.r.t. a given ontology. Our results include a PTime/coNP-dichotomy for ontologies of depth one in the description logic ALCFI, the same dichotomy for ALC- and ALCI-ontologies of unrestricted depth, and the non-existence of such a dichotomy for ALCF-ontologies. For the latter DL, we additionally show that it is undecidable whether a given ontology admits PTime query evaluation. We also consider the connection between PTime query evaluation and rewritability into (monadic) Datalog.