Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Benjamin Zarrieß
dblp:132/5788
· DBLP profile ↗
7ranked-venue papers
5as first author
1since 2021 · last 2022
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 6 · 5 first-authorGraphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 5 · 4 first-authorSoftware engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1 · 1 since 2021Theory of computation · 1 · 1 first-author
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Artificial intelligence
5 papers |
Knowledge representation and reasoning · 92% Learning theory · 8% | |
| Theoretical computer science
4 papers |
Automated reasoning and model checking · 40% Computational complexity · 32% Logic in computer science · 28% |
Topics — the 9 heaviest of 12, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning
description logic |
0.6 | 3 | 2018 | Complexity of Projection with Stochastic Actions in a Probabilistic Description Logic · KR 2018 Most Specific Generalizations w.r.t. General EL-TBoxes · IJCAI 2013 Verification of Knowledge-Based Programs over Description Logic Actions · IJCAI 2015 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning › description logic
probabilistic description logic |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Complexity of Projection with Stochastic Actions in a Probabilistic Description Logic · KR 2018 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning › reasoning about action and change › reasoning about actions
situation calculus |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Decidable Verification of Golog Programs over Non-Local Effect Actions · AAAI 2016 |
Logic in computer science
semantics |
0.2 | 2 | 2014 | Exploring the Boundaries of Decidable Verification of Non-Terminating Golog Programs · AAAI 2014 Most Specific Generalizations w.r.t. General EL-TBoxes · IJCAI 2013 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning › reasoning about action and change › reasoning about actions
golog |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | Exploring the Boundaries of Decidable Verification of Non-Terminating Golog Programs · AAAI 2014 |
Knowledge, reasoning and agents › Knowledge representation and reasoning › reasoning about action and change
reasoning about actions |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | Exploring the Boundaries of Decidable Verification of Non-Terminating Golog Programs · AAAI 2014 |
Automated reasoning and model checking
temporal logic verification |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | Exploring the Boundaries of Decidable Verification of Non-Terminating Golog Programs · AAAI 2014 |
Machine learning › Learning theory
generalization |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | Most Specific Generalizations w.r.t. General EL-TBoxes · IJCAI 2013 |
Logic in computer science › knowledge representation and reasoning › description logic
description logic semantics |
0.0 | 1 | 2013 | Most Specific Generalizations w.r.t. General EL-TBoxes · IJCAI 2013 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
stochastic actions · 0.7computational complexity analysis · 0.7verification · 0.4generalization · 0.3two-variable fragment of first-order logic · 0.2CTL* model checking · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | Efficient TBox Reasoning with Value Restrictions using the ℱℒ0wer ReasonerabstractAbstract The inexpressive Description Logic (DL) ${\cal F}{{\cal L}_0}$ , which has conjunction and value restriction as its only concept constructors, had fallen into disrepute when it turned out that reasoning in ${\cal F}{{\cal L}_0}$ w.r.t. general TBoxes is ExpTime-complete, that is, as hard as in the considerably more expressive logic ${\cal A}{\cal L}{\cal C}$ . In this paper, we rehabilitate ${\cal F}{{\cal L}_0}$ by presenting a dedicated subsumption algorithm for ${\cal F}{{\cal L}_0}$ , which is much simpler than the tableau-based algorithms employed by highly optimized DL reasoners. Our experiments show that the performance of our novel algorithm, as prototypically implemented in our ${\cal F}{{\cal L}_0}$ wer reasoner, compares very well with that of the highly optimized reasoners. ${\cal F}{{\cal L}_0}$ wer can also deal with ontologies written in the extension ${\cal F}{{\cal L}_ \bot }$ of ${\cal F}{{\cal L}_0}$ with the top and the bottom concept by employing a polynomial-time reduction, shown in this paper, which eliminates top and bottom. We also investigate the complexity of reasoning in DLs related to the Horn-fragments of ${\cal F}{{\cal L}_0}$ and ${\cal F}{{\cal L}_ \bot }$ . Franz Baader, Patrick Koopmann, Friedrich Michel, Anni-Yasmin Turhan, Benjamin Zarrieß |
Theory Pract. Log. Program. | 5 |
| 2018 | Complexity of Projection with Stochastic Actions in a Probabilistic Description Logic
Benjamin Zarrieß |
KR | 1 |
| 2016 | Decidable Verification of Golog Programs over Non-Local Effect ActionsabstractThe Golog action programming language is a powerful means to express high-level behaviours in terms of programs over actions defined in a Situation Calculus theory. In particular for physical systems, verifying that the program satisfies certain desired temporal properties is often crucial, but undecidable in general, the latter being due to the language's high expressiveness in terms of first-order quantification, range of action effects, and program constructs. So far, approaches to achieve decidability involved restrictions where action effects either had to be context-free (i.e. not depend on the current state), local (i.e. only affect objects mentioned in the action's parameters), or at least bounded (i.e. only affect a finite number of objects). In this paper, we introduce two new, more general classes of action theories that allow for context-sensitive, non-local, unbounded effects, i.e. actions that may affect an unbounded number of possibly unnamed objects in a state-dependent fashion. We contribute to the further exploration of the boundary between decidability and undecidability for Golog, showing that for our new classes of action theories in the two-variable fragment of first-order logic, verification of CTL* properties of programs over ground actions is decidable. Benjamin Zarrieß, Jens Claßen |
AAAI | 1 |
| 2015 | Verification of Knowledge-Based Programs over Description Logic Actions
Benjamin Zarrieß, Jens Claßen |
IJCAI | 1 |
| 2014 | Exploring the Boundaries of Decidable Verification of Non-Terminating Golog ProgramsabstractThe action programming language GOLOG has been found useful for the control of autonomous agents such as mobile robots. In scenarios like these, tasks are often open-ended so that the respective control programs are non-terminating. Before deploying such programs on a robot, it is often desirable to verify that they meet certain requirements. For this purpose, Claßen and Lakemeyer recently introduced algorithms for the verification of temporal properties of GOLOG programs. However, given the expressiveness of GOLOG, their verification procedures are not guaranteed to terminate. In this paper, we show how decidability can be obtained by suitably restricting the underlying base logic, the effect axioms for primitive actions, and the use of actions within GOLOG programs. Moreover, we show that dropping any of these restrictions immediately leads to undecidability of the verification problem. Jens Claßen, Martin Liebenberg, Gerhard Lakemeyer, Benjamin Zarrieß |
AAAI | 4 |
| 2014 | Verifying CTL* Properties of GOLOG Programs over Local-Effect ActionsabstractGOLOG is a high-level action programming language for controlling autonomous agents such as mobile robots. It is defined on top of a logic-based action theory expressed in the Situation Calculus. Before a program is deployed onto an actual robot and executed in the physical world, it is desirable, if not crucial, to verify that it meets certain requirements (typically expressed through temporal formulas) and thus indeed exhibits the desired behaviour. However, due to the high (first-order) expressiveness of the language, the corresponding verification problem is in general undecidable. In this paper, we extend earlier results to identify a large, non-trivial fragment of the formalism where verification is decidable. In particular, we consider properties expressed in a first-order variant of the branching-time temporal logic CTL*. Decidability is obtained by (1) resorting to the decidable first-order fragment C2as underlying base logic, (2) using a fragment of GOLOG with ground actions only, and (3) requiring the action theory to only admit local effects. Benjamin Zarrieß, Jens Claßen |
ECAI | 1 |
| 2013 | Most Specific Generalizations w.r.t. General EL-TBoxes
Benjamin Zarrieß, Anni-Yasmin Turhan |
IJCAI | 1 |