[Pellet-users] swrl rule preventing inference ?

[Evren Sirin]

This definitely looks like a bug and I was able to reproduce it. I've 
opened a ticket for it [1] and we'll look into this. Thanks for 
reporting the problem.

Cheers,
Evren

[1] http://cvsdude.com/trac/clark-parsia/pellet-devel/ticket/105

On 2/26/08 10:06 PM, Alejandro Sanchez wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I cannot find out why a particular inference is not done when adding 
> rules to the ontology. Please, let me know if you can find out what is 
> wrong. I attach two ontologies and I briefly explain the problem.
>
> Both ontologies have the following classes:
>
> * Adult equivalentClass Person and hasAge only nonNegativeInteger[>=21]
>
> * NotAdult equivalentClass Person and not Adult
>
> * EligibleForChildBenefit equivalentClass Person and hasChild min 2 
> NotAdult
>
> In welfare-norule.owl Pellet infers the following individuals of 
> EligibleForChildBenefit1 (Nicolas) and 2 (Elizabet).
>
> In welfare.owl there are some extra swrl rules, among them the 
> following one:
>
> * EligibleForChildBenefit(?x), ChildBenefit(?y) -> isEligibleFor(?x, ?y)
>
> After adding this rule, Pellet stops infering 1 and 2 as individuals 
> of EligibleForChildBenefit.
>
> Why 1 and 2 are not infered as EligibleForChildBenefit after adding 
> the rule?
>
> Many Thanks, Ale.
>
> P.S.: If EligibleForChildBenefit is redefined in welfare.owl changing 
> NotAdult with Person, Pellet infers 1 and 2 as individuals of 
> EligibleForChildBenefit.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pellet-users mailing list
> Pellet-users at lists.owldl.com
> http://lists.owldl.com/mailman/listinfo/pellet-users
> _______________________________________________
>
> Sponsored by Clark & Parsia, LLC http://clarkparsia.com/