Editing Description logic (section)

==Modeling==

=== TBox vs Abox ===
In DL, a distinction is drawn between the so-called [[abox|TBox]] (terminological box) and the [[ABox]] (assertional box). In general, the TBox contains sentences describing concept hierarchies (i.e., relations between [[concept]]s) while the ABox contains [[ground sentence]]s stating where in the hierarchy, individuals belong (i.e., relations between individuals and concepts). For example, the statement:

{{NumBlk|:|Every employee is a person|{{EquationRef|1}}}}

belongs in the TBox, while the statement:

{{NumBlk|:|Bob is an employee|{{EquationRef|2}}}}

belongs in the ABox.

Note that the TBox/ABox distinction is not significant, in the same sense that the two "kinds" of sentences are not treated differently in first-order logic (which subsumes most DL). When translated into first-order logic, a subsumption [[axiom]] like ({{EquationNote|1}}) is simply a conditional restriction to [[unary operation|unary]] [[Predicate (logic)|predicate]]s (concepts) with only variables appearing in it. Clearly, a sentence of this form is not privileged or special over sentences in which only constants ("grounded" values) appear like ({{EquationNote|2}}).

=== Motivation for having Tbox and Abox ===
So why was the distinction introduced? The primary reason is that the separation can be useful when describing and formulating decision-procedures for various DL. For example, a reasoner might process the TBox and ABox separately, in part because certain key inference problems are tied to one but not the other one ('classification' is related to the TBox, 'instance checking' to the ABox). Another example is that the complexity of the TBox can greatly affect the performance of a given decision-procedure for a certain DL, independently of the ABox. Thus, it is useful to have a way to talk about that specific part of the [[knowledge base]].

The secondary reason is that the distinction can make sense from the knowledge base modeler's perspective. It is plausible to distinguish between our conception of terms/concepts in the world (class axioms in the TBox) and particular manifestations of those terms/concepts (instance assertions in the ABox). In the above example: when the hierarchy within a company is the same in every branch but the assignment to employees is different in every department (because there are other people working there), it makes sense to reuse the TBox for different branches that do not use the same ABox.

There are two features of description logic that are not shared by most other data description formalisms: DL does not make the [[unique name assumption]] (UNA) or the [[closed-world assumption]] (CWA). Not having UNA means that two concepts with different names may be allowed by some inference to be shown to be equivalent. Not having CWA, or rather having the [[open world assumption]] (OWA) means that lack of knowledge of a fact does not immediately imply knowledge of the negation of a fact.