[DL] Question on DL negation
Maurizio Lenzerini
lenzerini at dis.uniroma1.it
Fri Mar 23 11:33:49 CET 2007
I am not sure I understand your question. However, rules with one
negated atom in the head are typically disjointness constraints
(asserting that a set of predicates do not have common instances), and
usually introducing these constraints in a DL is not complex.
Matt Williams ha scritto:
> Dear All,
>
> As I understand, most DL's do not allow for the negation of roles.
>
> However, given a formula of the form R(x,y) (where R is some role),
> since this is equivalent to (R(x,y) & \top(y)) which could be negated as
> ¬( R(x,y) & \top(y)), is it possible to effectively relax this
> constraint in some cases without affecting the logic?
>
> I'm interested in rules that have a single role as the head, and
> negation of such heads would be useful...
>
> Thanks,
>
> Matt
--
Maurizio
------------------------------------------------------------
Prof. Maurizio Lenzerini
Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica "Antonio Ruberti"
Università degli Studi di Roma "La Sapienza"
Via Salaria 113, I-00198 Roma, Italy
Tel: +39 - 06 - 8841954
Fax: +39 - 06 - 85300849
E-mail: lenzerini at dis.uniroma1.it
Home page: http://www.dis.uniroma1.it/~lenzerini
More information about the dl
mailing list