4 Search Results for "Oetsch, Johannes"

Document
Use Case
DOI: 10.4230/TGDK.3.3.5
LLM-Supported Manufacturing Mapping Generation

Authors: Wilma Johanna Schmidt, Irlan Grangel-González, Adrian Paschke, and Evgeny Kharlamov

Published in: TGDK, Volume 3, Issue 3 (2025). Transactions on Graph Data and Knowledge, Volume 3, Issue 3

Abstract
In large manufacturing companies, such as Bosch, that operate thousands of production lines with each comprising up to dozens of production machines and other equipment, even simple inventory questions such as of location and quantities of a particular equipment type require non-trivial solutions. Addressing these questions requires to integrate multiple heterogeneous data sets which is time consuming and error prone and demands domain as well as knowledge experts. Knowledge graphs (KGs) are practical for consolidating inventory data by bringing it into the same format and linking inventory items. However, the KG creation and maintenance itself pose challenges as mappings are needed to connect data sets and ontologies. In this work, we address these challenges by exploring LLM-supported and context-enhanced generation of both YARRRML and RML mappings. Facing large ontologies in the manufacturing domain and token limitations in LLM prompts, we further evaluate ontology reduction methods in our approach. We evaluate our approach both quantitatively against reference mappings created manually by experts and, for YARRRML, also qualitatively with expert feedback. This work extends the exploration of the challenges with LLM-supported and context-enhanced mapping generation YARRRML [Schmidt et al., 2025] by comprehensive analyses on RML mappings and an ontology reduction evaluation. We further publish the source code of this work. Our work provides a valuable support when creating manufacturing mappings and supports data and schema updates.
Cite as

Wilma Johanna Schmidt, Irlan Grangel-González, Adrian Paschke, and Evgeny Kharlamov. LLM-Supported Manufacturing Mapping Generation. In Transactions on Graph Data and Knowledge (TGDK), Volume 3, Issue 3, pp. 5:1-5:22, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2025)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@Article{schmidt_et_al:TGDK.3.3.5,
  author =	{Schmidt, Wilma Johanna and Grangel-Gonz\'{a}lez, Irlan and Paschke, Adrian and Kharlamov, Evgeny},
  title =	{{LLM-Supported Manufacturing Mapping Generation}},
  journal =	{Transactions on Graph Data and Knowledge},
  pages =	{5:1--5:22},
  ISSN =	{2942-7517},
  year =	{2025},
  volume =	{3},
  number =	{3},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/TGDK.3.3.5},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-252164},
  doi =		{10.4230/TGDK.3.3.5},
  annote =	{Keywords: Mapping Generation, Knowledge Graph Construction, Ontology Reduction, RML, YARRRML, LLM, Manufacturing}
}
Document
Invited Paper
DOI: 10.4230/OASIcs.RW.2024/2025.6
Explaining Reasoning Results for Description Logic Ontologies (Invited Paper)

Authors: Patrick Koopmann

Published in: OASIcs, Volume 138, Joint Proceedings of the 20th and 21st Reasoning Web Summer Schools (RW 2024 & RW 2025)

Abstract
The Web Ontology Language (OWL), grounded in description logics, enables reasoning systems to infer implicit knowledge in a transparent manner. However, the expressivity of description logics and the complexity of large ontologies often results in reasoning outcomes that are hard to understand without additional tool support. Explanations of these outcomes are essential for users to understand ontology content, communicate its structure and behavior effectively, and debug undesired or missing inferences. This chapter provides an overview of the central explanation techniques that have been developed for explaining reasoning with description logic ontologies. Here, we consider both explanations for positive entailments (explaining why something can be deduced), as well as negative entailments (why something cannot be deduced). More specifically, we discuss justifications, proofs and interpolation as a means to explain positive entailments, and abduction for explaining negative entailments, where we also have a closer look at practical algorithms as well as practical and theoretical challenges.
Cite as

Patrick Koopmann. Explaining Reasoning Results for Description Logic Ontologies (Invited Paper). In Joint Proceedings of the 20th and 21st Reasoning Web Summer Schools (RW 2024 & RW 2025). Open Access Series in Informatics (OASIcs), Volume 138, pp. 6:1-6:29, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2025)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{koopmann:OASIcs.RW.2024/2025.6,
  author =	{Koopmann, Patrick},
  title =	{{Explaining Reasoning Results for Description Logic Ontologies}},
  booktitle =	{Joint Proceedings of the 20th and 21st Reasoning Web Summer Schools (RW 2024 \& RW 2025)},
  pages =	{6:1--6:29},
  series =	{Open Access Series in Informatics (OASIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-95977-405-5},
  ISSN =	{2190-6807},
  year =	{2025},
  volume =	{138},
  editor =	{Artale, Alessandro and Bienvenu, Meghyn and Garc{\'\i}a, Yazm{\'\i}n Ib\'{a}\~{n}ez and Murlak, Filip},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/OASIcs.RW.2024/2025.6},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-250514},
  doi =		{10.4230/OASIcs.RW.2024/2025.6},
  annote =	{Keywords: Explanations, Justifications, Proofs, Craig Interpolation, Contrastive Explanations}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.ICLP.2012.222
An FLP-Style Answer-Set Semantics for Abstract-Constraint Programs with Disjunctions

Authors: Johannes Oetsch, Jörg Pührer, and Hans Tompits

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 17, Technical Communications of the 28th International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP'12) (2012)

Abstract
We introduce an answer-set semantics for abstract-constraint programs with disjunction in rule heads in the style of Faber, Leone, and Pfeifer (FLP). To this end, we extend the definition of an answer set for logic programs with aggregates in rule bodies using the usual FLP-reduct. Additionally, we also provide a characterisation of our semantics in terms of unfounded sets, likewise generalising the standard concept of an unfounded set. Our work is motivated by the desire to have simple and rule-based definitions of the semantics of an answer-set programming (ASP) language that is close to those implemented by the most prominent ASP solvers. The new definitions are intended as a theoretical device to allow for development methods and methodologies for ASP, e.g., debugging or testing techniques, that are general enough to work for different types of solvers. We use abstract constraints as an abstraction of literals whose truth values depend on subsets of an interpretation. This includes weight constraints, aggregates, and external atoms, which are frequently used in real-world answer-set programs. We compare the new semantics to previous semantics for abstract-constraint programs and show that they are equivalent to recent extensions of the FLP semantics to propositional and first-order theories when abstract-constraint programs are viewed as theories.
Cite as

Johannes Oetsch, Jörg Pührer, and Hans Tompits. An FLP-Style Answer-Set Semantics for Abstract-Constraint Programs with Disjunctions. In Technical Communications of the 28th International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP'12). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 17, pp. 222-234, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2012)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{oetsch_et_al:LIPIcs.ICLP.2012.222,
  author =	{Oetsch, Johannes and P\"{u}hrer, J\"{o}rg and Tompits, Hans},
  title =	{{An FLP-Style Answer-Set Semantics for Abstract-Constraint Programs with Disjunctions}},
  booktitle =	{Technical Communications of the 28th International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP'12)},
  pages =	{222--234},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-939897-43-9},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2012},
  volume =	{17},
  editor =	{Dovier, Agostino and Santos Costa, V{\'\i}tor},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.ICLP.2012.222},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-36246},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.ICLP.2012.222},
  annote =	{Keywords: answer-set programming, abstract constraints, aggregates, disjunction}
}
Document
DOI: 10.4230/LIPIcs.ICLP.2010.154
Methods and Methodologies for Developing Answer-Set Programs - Project Description

Authors: Johannes Oetsch, Jörg Pührer, and Hans Tompits

Published in: LIPIcs, Volume 7, Technical Communications of the 26th International Conference on Logic Programming (2010)

Abstract
Answer-set programming (ASP) is a well-known formalism for declarative problem solving, enjoying a continuously increasing number of diverse applications. However, arguably one of the main challenges for a wider acceptance of ASP is the need of tools, methods, and methodologies that support the actual programming process. In this paper, we review the main goals of a project, funded by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF), which aims to address this aspect in a systematic manner. The project is planned for a duration of three years and started in September 2009. Generally, the focus of research will be on methodologies for systematic program development, program testing, and debugging. In particular, in working on these areas, special emphasis shall be given to the ability of the developed techniques to respect the declarative nature of ASP. To support a sufficient level of usability, solutions are planned to be compatible not only for the core language of ASP but also for important extensions thereof that are commonly used and realised in various answer-set solvers. Ultimately, the methods resulting from the project shall form the basis of an integrated development environment (IDE) for ASP that is envisaged to combine straightforward as well as advanced techniques, realising a convenient tool for developing answer-set programs.
Cite as

Johannes Oetsch, Jörg Pührer, and Hans Tompits. Methods and Methodologies for Developing Answer-Set Programs - Project Description. In Technical Communications of the 26th International Conference on Logic Programming. Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 7, pp. 154-161, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2010)

Copy BibTex To Clipboard

@InProceedings{oetsch_et_al:LIPIcs.ICLP.2010.154,
  author =	{Oetsch, Johannes and P\"{u}hrer, J\"{o}rg and Tompits, Hans},
  title =	{{Methods and Methodologies for Developing Answer-Set Programs - Project Description}},
  booktitle =	{Technical Communications of the 26th International Conference on Logic Programming},
  pages =	{154--161},
  series =	{Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs)},
  ISBN =	{978-3-939897-17-0},
  ISSN =	{1868-8969},
  year =	{2010},
  volume =	{7},
  editor =	{Hermenegildo, Manuel and Schaub, Torsten},
  publisher =	{Schloss Dagstuhl -- Leibniz-Zentrum f{\"u}r Informatik},
  address =	{Dagstuhl, Germany},
  URL =		{https://drops.dagstuhl.de/entities/document/10.4230/LIPIcs.ICLP.2010.154},
  URN =		{urn:nbn:de:0030-drops-25937},
  doi =		{10.4230/LIPIcs.ICLP.2010.154},
  annote =	{Keywords: Answer-set programming, program development, testing, debugging}
}
  • Refine by Type
  • 4 Document/PDF
  • 2 Document/HTML

  • Refine by Publication Year
  • 2 2025
  • 1 2012
  • 1 2010

  • Refine by Author
  • 2 Oetsch, Johannes
  • 2 Pührer, Jörg
  • 2 Tompits, Hans
  • 1 Grangel-González, Irlan
  • 1 Kharlamov, Evgeny
  • Show More...

  • Refine by Series/Journal
  • 2 LIPIcs
  • 1 OASIcs
  • 1 TGDK

  • Refine by Classification
  • 1 Computing methodologies → Description logics
  • 1 Computing methodologies → Semantic networks

  • Refine by Keyword
  • 1 Answer-set programming
  • 1 Contrastive Explanations
  • 1 Craig Interpolation
  • 1 Explanations
  • 1 Justifications
  • Show More...

Any Issues?
X

Feedback on the Current Page

CAPTCHA

Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted to Dagstuhl Publishing

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail
© 2023-2026 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH About DROPS Imprint Privacy Contact