Why Not? Explaining Missing Entailments with Evee (Technical Report)
This work solves the issue for ontology users who need to understand missing consequences in description logic, though it is incremental as it builds on existing techniques.
The paper tackles the problem of explaining why expected logical entailments are missing from an ontology, by extending the Protégé plugin Evee to provide explanations using abduction and counterexamples, resulting in a new version that addresses this gap in existing explanation methods.
Understanding logical entailments derived by a description logic reasoner is not always straight-forward for ontology users. For this reason, various methods for explaining entailments using justifications and proofs have been developed and implemented as plug-ins for the ontology editor Protégé. However, when the user expects a missing consequence to hold, it is equally important to explain why it does not follow from the ontology. In this paper, we describe a new version of $\rm E{\scriptsize VEE}$, a Protégé plugin that now also provides explanations for missing consequences, via existing and new techniques based on abduction and counterexamples.