We study Consistent Query Answering (CQA) over knowledge bases with existential rules. Specifically, we propose a novel framework for CQA that combines previous approaches, allowing for the simultaneous presence of both open and closed predicates, i.e. predicates interpreted under open- and closed-world assumption, respectively. We establish the data complexity of answering unions of conjunctive queries in such a new framework under the so-called AR semantics and for different classes of existential rules. We also provide new complexity results for the standard (i.e. non-inconsistency tolerant) query answering in the presence of both open and closed predicates. Our results show that, for certain classes of rules, the complexity of CQA matches that of non-inconsistency-tolerant query answering.

We propose a general framework for assessing the exposure of sensitive knowledge in policy-protected knowledge bases (KBs), where knowledge is represented as logical theories and data protection policies are defined declaratively using epistemic dependencies. The framework models scenarios in which confidential parts of the KB may be publicly known due to security breaches. We study two fundamental decision problems: determining whether the exposed knowledge violates the data protection policy (leakage), and whether there exists a secure view of the KB that complies with the policy. We analyze the computational complexity (specifically, data complexity) of these problems, focusing on the DL-Lite_R and EL_\bot Description Logics. Our findings show that, for DL-Lite_R with restricted forms of policy, both the problems can be efficiently solved through query rewriting methods. For EL_\bot, we establish conditions for tractable computational bounds. Our results highlight the potential of this framework for practical applications in confidentiality-preserving knowledge management.

Controlled Query Evaluation (CQE) is a methodology designed to maintain confidentiality by either rejecting specific queries or adjusting responses to safeguard sensitive information. In this investigation, our focus centers on CQE within Description Logic ontologies, aiming to ensure that queries are answered truthfully as long as possible before resorting to deceptive responses, a cooperativity property which is called the “longest honeymoon”. Our work introduces new semantics for CQE, denoted as MC-CQE, which enjoys the longest honeymoon property and outperforms previous methodologies in terms of cooperativity. We study the complexity of query answering in this new framework for ontologies expressed in the Description Logic DL-Lite_R. Specifically, we establish data complexity results under different maximally cooperative semantics and for different classes of queries. Our results identify both tractable and intractable cases. In particular, we show that the evaluation of Boolean unions of conjunctive queries is the same under all the above semantics and its data complexity is in AC^0. This result makes query answering amenable to SQL query rewriting. However, this favorable property does not extend to open queries, even with a restricted query language limited to conjunctions of atoms. While, in general, answering open queries in the MC-CQE framework is intractable, we identify a sub-family of semantics under which answering full conjunctive queries is tractable.

In this paper we study Controlled Query Evaluation (CQE), a declarative approach to privacy-preserving query answering over databases, knowledge bases, and ontologies. CQE is based on the notion of censor, which defines the answers to each query posed to the data/knowledge base. We investigate both semantic and computational properties of CQE in the context of OWL ontologies, and specifically in the description logic DL-LiteR, which underpins the OWL 2 QL profile. In our analysis, we focus on semantics of CQE based on censors (called optimal GA censors) that enjoy the so-called indistinguishability property, analyzing the trade-off between maximizing the amount of data disclosed by query answers and minimizing the computational cost of privacy-preserving query answering. We first study the data complexity of skeptical entailment of unions of conjunctive queries under all the optimal GA censors, showing that the computational cost of query answering in this setting is intractable. To overcome this computational issue, we then define a different semantics for CQE centered around the notion of intersection of all the optimal GA censors. We show that query answering over OWL 2 QL ontologies under the new intersection-based semantics for CQE enjoys tractability and is first-order rewritable, i.e. amenable to be implemented through SQL query rewriting techniques and the use of standard relational database systems; on the other hand, this approach shows limitations in terms of amount of data disclosed. To improve this aspect, we add preferences between ontology predicates to the CQE framework, and identify a semantics under which query answering over OWL 2 QL ontologies maintains the same computational properties of the intersection-based approach without preferences.

Controlled Query Evaluation (CQE) is a framework for the protection of confidential data, where a policy given in terms of logic formulae indicates which information must be kept private. Functions called censors filter query answering so that no answers are returned that may lead a user to infer data protected by the policy. The preferred censors, called optimal censors, are the ones that conceal only what is necessary, thus maximizing the returned answers. Typically, given a policy over a data or knowledge base, several optimal censors exist. Our research on CQE is based on the following intuition: confidential data are those that violate the logical assertions specifying the policy, and thus censoring them in query answering is similar to processing queries in the presence of inconsistent data as studied in Consistent Query Answering (CQA). In this paper, we investigate the relationship between CQE and CQA in the context of Description Logic ontologies. We borrow the idea from CQA that query answering is a form of skeptical reasoning that takes into account all possible optimal censors. This approach leads to a revised notion of CQE, which allows us to avoid making an arbitrary choice on the censor to be selected, as done by previous research on the topic. We then study the data complexity of query answering in our CQE framework, for conjunctive queries issued over ontologies specified in the popular Description Logics DL-LiteR and EL⊥. In our analysis, we consider some variants of the censor language, which is the language used by the censor to enforce the policy. Whereas the problem is in general intractable for simple censor languages, we show that for DL-LiteR ontologies it is first-order rewritable, and thus in AC0 in data complexity, for the most expressive censor language we propose.

In this paper we study instance-level update in DL-LiteA , a well-known description logic that influenced the OWL 2 QL standard. Instance-level update regards insertions and deletions in the ABox of an ontology. In particular we focus on formula-based approaches to instance-level update. We show that DL-LiteA , which is well-known for enjoying first-order rewritability of query answering, enjoys a first-order rewritability property also for instance-level update. That is, every update can be reformulated into a set of insertion and deletion instructions computable through a non-recursive Datalog program with negation. Such a program is readily translatable into a first-order query over the ABox considered as a database, and hence into SQL. By exploiting this result, we implement an update component for DL-LiteA-based systems and perform some experiments showing that the approach works in practice.

We study privacy-preserving query answering in Description Logics (DLs). Specifically, we consider the approach of controlled query evaluation (CQE) based on the notion of instance indistinguishability. We derive data complexity results for query answering over DL-LiteR ontologies, through a comparison with an alternative, existing confidentiality-preserving approach to CQE. Finally, we identify a semantically well-founded notion of approximated query answering for CQE, and prove that, for DL-LiteR ontologies, this form of CQE is tractable with respect to data complexity and is first-order rewritable, i.e., it is always reducible to the evaluation of a first-order query over the data instance.

[No abstract available]

Controlled Query Evaluation (CQE) is a confidentiality-preserving framework in which private information is protected through a policy, and a (optimal) censor guarantees that answers to queries are maximized without violating the policy. CQE has been recently studied in the context of ontologies, where the focus has been mainly on the problem of the existence of an optimal censor. In this paper we instead consider query answering over all possible optimal censors. We study data complexity of this problem for ontologies specified in the Description Logics DL-LiteR and EL_bottom and for variants of the censor language, which is the language used by the censor to enforce the policy. In our investigation we also analyze the relationship between CQE and the problem of Consistent Query Answering (CQA). Some of the complexity results we provide are indeed obtained through mutual reduction between CQE and CQA.

We present the framework of ontology-based data access, a semantic paradigm for providing a convenient and user-friendly access to data repositories, which has been actively developed and studied in the past decade. Focusing on relational data sources, we discuss the main ingredients of ontology-based data access, key theoretical results, techniques, applications and future challenges.

In this paper we study the evolution of ontology-based data access (OBDA) specifications, and focus on the case in which the ontology and/or the data source schema change, which may require a modification to the mapping between them to preserve both consistency and knowledge. Our approach is based on the idea of repairing the mapping according to the usual principle of minimal change and on a recent, mapping-based notion of consistency of the specification. We define and analyze two notions of mapping repair under ontology and source schema update. We then present a set of results on the complexity of query answering in the above framework, when the ontology is expressed in DL-LiteR.

In ontology-based data access (OBDA), an ontology is connected to autonomous, and generally pre-existing, data repositories through mappings, so as to provide a high-level, conceptual view over such data. User queries are posed over the ontology, and answers are computed by reasoning both on the ontology and the mappings. Query answering in OBDA systems is typically performed through a query rewriting approach which is divided into two steps: (i) the query is rewritten with respect to the ontology (ontology rewriting of the query); (ii) the query thus obtained is then reformulated over the database schema using the mapping assertions (mapping rewriting of the query). In this paper we present a new approach to the optimization of query rewriting in OBDA. The key ideas of our approach are the usage of inclusion between mapping views and the usage of perfect mappings, which allow us to drastically lower the combinatorial explosion due to mapping rewriting. These ideas are formalized in PerfectMap, an algorithm for OBDA query rewriting. We have experimented PerfectMap in a real-world OBDA scenario: our experimental results clearly show that, in such a scenario, the optimizations of PerfectMap are crucial to effectively perform query answering.

Ontology-based data access (OBDA) is a novel paradigm for accessing large data repositories through an ontology, that is a formal description of a domain of interest. Supporting the management of OBDA applications poses new challenges, as it requires to provide effective tools for (i) allowing both expert and non-expert users to analyze the OBDA specification, (ii) collaboratively documenting the ontology, (iii) exploiting OBDA services, such as query answering and automated reasoning over ontologies, e.g., to support data quality check, and (iv) tuning the OBDA application towards optimized performances. To fulfill these challenges, we have built a novel system, called MASTRO STUDIO, based on a tool for automated reasoning over ontologies, enhanced with a suite of tools and optimization facilities for managing OBDA applications. To show the effectiveness of MASTRO STUDIO, we demonstrate its usage in one OBDA application developed in collaboration with the Italian Ministry of Economy and Finance.

In this paper we introduce the notion of mapping-based knowledge base (MKB) to formalize the situation where both the extensional and the intensional level of the ontology are determined by suitable mappings to a set of (relational) data sources. This allows for making the intensional level of the ontology as dynamic as traditionally the extensional level is. To do so, we resort to the meta-modeling capabilities of higher-order Description Logics, which allow us to see concepts and roles as individuals, and vice versa. The challenge in this setting is to design tractable query answering algorithms. Besides the definition of MKBs, our main result is that answering instance queries posed to MKBs expressed in Hi(DL-LiteR) can be done efficiently. In particular, we define a query rewriting technique that produces first-order (SQL) queries to be posed to the data sources.

An artifact-centric service is a stateful service that holistically represents both the data and the process in terms of a (dynamic) artifact. An artifact is constituted by a data component, holding all the data of interest for the service, and a lifecycle, which specifies the process that the service enacts. In this paper, we study artifact-centric services whose data component is a full-fledged relational database, queried through (first-order) conjunctive queries, and the lifecycle component is specified as sets of condition-action rules, where actions are tasks invocations, again based on conjunctive queries. Notably, the database can evolve in an unbounded way due to new values (unknown at verification time) inserted by tasks. The main result of the paper is that verification in this setting is decidable under a reasonable restriction on the form of tasks, called weak acyclicity, which we borrow from the recent literature on data exchange. In particular, we develop a sound, complete and terminating verification procedure for sophisticated temporal properties expressed in a first-order variant of μ-calculus.

We investigate an extension of Description Logics (DL) with higher-order capabilities, based on Henkin-style semantics. Our study starts from the observation that the various possibilities of adding higher-order con- structs to a DL form a spectrum of increasing expres- sive power, including domain metamodeling, i.e., using concepts and roles as predicate arguments. We argue that higher-order features of this type are sufficiently rich and powerful for the modeling requirements aris- ing in many relevant situations, and therefore we carry out an investigation of the computational complexity of satisfiability and conjunctive query answering in DLs extended with such higher-order features. In particular, we show that adding domain metamodeling capabilities to SHIQ (the core of OWL 2) has no impact on the complexity of the various reasoning tasks. This is also true for DL-LiteR (the core of OWL 2 QL) under suit- able restrictions on the queries.

We study the problem of dealing with inconsistency in Description Logic (DL) ontologies. We consider inconsistency-tolerant semantics recently proposed in the literature, called AR-semantics and CAR-semantics, which are based on repairing (i.e., modifying) in a minimal way the extensional knowledge (ABox) while keeping the intensional knowledge (TBox) untouched. We study instance checking and conjunctive query entailment under the above inconsistency-tolerant semantics for a wide spectrum of DLs, ranging from tractable ones (EL) to very expressive ones (SHIQ), showing that reasoning under the above semantics is inherently intractable, even for very simple DLs. To the aim of overcoming such a high computational complexity of reasoning, we study sound approximations of the above semantics. Surprisingly, our computational analysis shows that reasoning under the approximated semantics is intractable even for tractable DLs. Finally, we identify suitable language restrictions of such DLs allowing for tractable reasoning under inconsistency-tolerant semantics.

Description logics (DLs) and rules are formalisms that emphasize different aspects of knowledge representation: whereas DLs are focused on specifying and reasoning about conceptual knowledge, rules are focused on nonmonotonic inference. Many applications, however, require features of both DLs and rules. Developing a formalism that integrates DLs and rules would be a natural outcome of a large body of research in knowledge representation and reasoning of the last two decades; however, achieving this goal is very challenging and the approaches proposed thus far have not fully reached it. In this paper, we present a hybrid formalism of MKNF + knowledge bases , which integrates DLs and rules in a coherent semantic framework. Achieving seamless integration is nontrivial, since DLs use an open-world assumption, while the rules are based on a closed-world assumption. We overcome this discrepancy by basing the semantics of our formalism on the logic of minimal knowledge and negation as failure (MKNF) by Lifschitz. We present several algorithms for reasoning with MKNF + knowledge bases, each suitable to different kinds of rules, and establish tight complexity bounds.

A Description Logic (DL) ontology is constituted by two components, a TBox that expresses general knowledge about the concepts and their relationships, and an ABox that describes the properties of individuals that are instances of concepts. We address the problem of how to deal with changes to a DL ontology, when these changes affect only the ABox, i.e. when the TBox is considered invariant. We consider two basic changes, namely instance-level update and instance-level erasure, roughly corresponding to the addition and the deletion of a set of facts involving individuals. We characterize the semantics of instance-level update and erasure on the basis of the approaches proposed by Winslett and by Katsuno and Mendelzon. Interestingly, DLs are typically not closed with respect to instance-level update and erasure, in the sense that the set of models corresponding to the application of any of these operations to a knowledge base in a DL L may not be expressible by ABoxes in L⁠. In particular, we show that this is true for DL-LiteF⁠, a tractable DL that is oriented towards data-intensive applications. To deal with this problem, we first introduce DL-LiteFS⁠, a DL that minimally extends DL-LiteF and is closed with respect to instance-level update, and present a polynomial algorithm for computing instance-level update in this logic. Then, we provide a principled notion of best approximation with respect to a fixed language L of instance-level update and erasure, and exploit the algorithm for instance-level update for DL-LiteFS to get polynomial algorithms for approximated instance-level update and erasure for DL-LiteF⁠. These results confirm the nice computational properties of DL-LiteF for data intensive applications, even where information about instances is not only read, but also written.

We focus on the aspect of sensing in reasoning about actions under qualitative and probabilistic uncertainty. We first define the action language E for reasoning about actions with sensing, which has a semantics based on the autoepistemic description logic ALCK NF , and which is given a formal semantics via a system of deterministic transitions between epistemic states. As an important feature, the main computational tasks in E can be done in linear and quadratic time. We then introduce the action language E + for reasoning about actions with sensing under qualitative and probabilistic uncertainty, which is an extension of E by actions with nondeterministic and probabilistic effects, and which is given a formal semantics in a system of deterministic, nondeterministic, and probabilistic transitions between epistemic states. We also define the notion of a belief graph, which represents the belief state of an agent after a sequence of deterministic, nondeterministic, and probabilistic actions, and which compactly represents a set of unnormalized probability distributions. Using belief graphs, we then introduce the notion of a conditional plan and its goodness for reasoning about actions under qualitative and probabilistic uncertainty. We formulate the problems of optimal and threshold conditional planning under qualitative and probabilistic uncertainty, and show that they are both uncomputable in general. We then give two algorithms for conditional planning in our framework. The first one is always sound, and it is also complete for the special case in which the relevant transitions between epistemic states are cycle-free. The second algorithm is a sound and complete solution to the problem of finite-horizon conditional planning in our framework. Under suitable assumptions, it computes every optimal finite-horizon conditional plan in polynomial time. We also describe an application of our formalism in a robotic-soccer scenario, which underlines its usefulness in realistic applications.

Data exchange and virtual data integration have been the subject of several investigations in the recent literature. At the same time, the notion of peer data management has emerged as a powerful abstraction of many forms of flexible and dynamic data-centere ddistributed systems. Although research on the above issues has progressed considerably in the last years, a clear understanding on how to combine data exchange and data integration in peer data management is still missing. This is the subject of the present paper. We start our investigation by first proposing a novel framework for peer data exchange, showing that it is a generalization of the classical data exchange setting. We also present algorithms for all the relevant data exchange tasks, and show that they can all be done in polynomial time with respect to data complexity. Based on the motivation that typical mappings and integrity constraints found in data integration are not captured by peer data exchange, we extend the framework to incorporate these features. One of the main difficulties is that the constraints of this new class are not amenable to materialization. We address this issue by resorting to a suitable combination of virtual and materialized data exchange, showing that the resulting framework is a generalization of both classical data exchange and classical data integration, and that the new setting incorporates the most expressive types of mapping and constraints considered in the two contexts. Finally, we present algorithms for all the relevant data management tasks also in the new setting, and show that, again, their data complexity is polynomial.

In this paper we study queries over relational databases with integrity constraints (ICs). The main problem we analyze is OWA query answering, i.e., query answering over a database with ICs under open-world assumption. The kinds of ICs that we consider are functional dependencies (in particular key dependencies) and inclusion dependencies; the query languages we consider are conjunctive queries (CQs), union of conjunctive queries (UCQs), CQs and UCQs with negation and/or inequality. We present a set of results about the decidability and finite controllability of OWA query answering under ICs. In particular: (i) we identify the decidability/undecidability frontier for OWA query answering under different combinations of the ICs allowed and the query language allowed; (ii) we study OWA query answering both over finite databases and over unrestricted databases, and identify the cases in which such a problem is finitely controllable, i.e., when OWA query answering over finite databases coincides with OWA query answering over unrestricted databases. Moreover, we are able to easily turn the above results into new results about implication of ICs and query containment under ICs, due to the deep relationship between OWA query answering and these two classical problems in database theory. In particular, we close two long-standing open problems in query containment, since we prove finite controllability of containment of conjunctive queries both under arbitrary inclusion dependencies and under key and foreign key dependencies. Besides their theoretical interest, we believe that the results of our investigation are very relevant in many research areas which have recently dealt with databases under an incomplete information assumption: e.g., view-based information access, ontology-based information systems, data integration, data exchange, and peer-to-peer information systems.

Research in consistent query answering studies the definition and computation of "meaningful" answers to queries posed to inconsistent databases, i.e., databases whose data do not satisfy the integrity constraints (ICs) declared on their schema. Computing consistent answers to conjunctive queries is generally coNP-hard in data complexity, even in the presence of very restricted forms of ICs (single, unary keys). Recent studies on consistent query answering for database schemas containing only key dependencies have analyzed the possibility of identifying classes of queries whose consistent answers can be obtained by a first-order rewriting of the query, which in turn can be easily formulated in SQL and directly evaluated through any relational DBMS. In this paper we study consistent query answering in the presence of key dependencies and exclusion dependencies. We first prove that even in the presence of only exclusion dependencies the problem is coNP-hard in data complexity, and define a general method for consistent answering of conjunctive queries under key and exclusion dependencies, based on the rewriting of the query in Datalog with negation. Then, we identify a subclass of conjunctive queries that can be first-order rewritten in the presence of key and exclusion dependencies, and define an algorithm for computing the first-order rewriting of a query belonging to such a class of queries. Finally, we compare the relative efficiency of the two methods for processing queries in the subclass above mentioned. Experimental results, conducted on a real and large database of the computer science engineering degrees of the University of Rome "La Sapienza", clearly show the computational advantage of the first-order based technique. Copyright 2005 ACM.

The task of an information integration system is to combine data residing at different sources, providing the user with a unified view of them, called global schema. Users formulate queries over the global schema, and the system suitably queries the sources, providing an answer to the user, who is not obliged to have any information about the sources. Recent developments in IT such as the expansion of the Internet and the World Wide Web, have made available to users a huge number of information sources, generally autonomous, heterogeneous and widely distributed: as a consequence, information integration has emerged as a crucial issue in many application domains, e.g., distributed databases, cooperative information systems, data warehousing, or on-demand computing. Recent estimates view information integration to be a $10 Billion market by 2006 [14].

In peer-to-peer data integration, each peer exports data in terms of its own schema, and data interoperation is achieved by means of mappings among the peer schemas. Peers are autonomous systems and mappings are dynamically created and changed. One of the challenges in these systems is answering queries posed to one peer taking into account the mappings. Obviously, query answering strongly depends on the semantics of the overall system. In this paper, we compare the commonly adopted approach of interpreting peerto-peer systems using a first-order semantics, with an alternative approach based on epistemic logic. We consider several central properties of peer-to-peer systems: modularity, generality, and decidability. We argue that the approach based on epistemic logic is superior with respect to all the above properties. In particular, we show that, in systems in which peers have decidable schemas and conjunctive mappings, but are arbitrarily interconnected, the first-order approach may lead to undecidability of query answering, while the epistemic approach always preserves decidability. This is a fundamental property, since the actual interconnections among peers are not under the control of any actor in the system. 1.

In databases with integrity constraints, data may not satisfy the constraints. In this paper, we address the problem of obtaining consistent answers in such a setting, when key and inclusion dependencies are expressed on the database schema. We establish decidability and complexity results for query answering under different assumptions on data (soundness and/or completeness). In particular, after showing that the problem is in general undecidable, we identify the maximal class of inclusion dependencies under which query answering is decidable in the presence of key dependencies. Although obtained in a single database context, such results are directly applicable to data integration, where multiple information sources may provide data that are inconsistent with respect to the global view of the sources.

The recent developments of computer and telecommunication technology, such as the expansion of the Internet and the World Wide Web, have made available to users a huge number of information sources, generally autonomous, heterogeneous and widely distributed. As a consequence, information integration has emerged as a crucial issue in many application domains, e.g., distributed databases, cooperative information systems, data warehousing, as well as in accessing distributed data over the Web.

We present description logics of minimal knowledge and negation as failure (MKNF-DLs), which augment description logics with modal operators interpreted according to Lifschitz's nonmonotonic logic MKNF. We show the usefulness of MKNF-DLs for a formal characterization of a wide variety of nonmonotonic features that are both commonly available inframe-based systems, and needed in the development of practical knowledge-based applications: defaults, integrity constraints, role, and concept closure. In addition, we provide a correct and terminating calculus for query answering in a very expressive MKNF-DL.

Information integration is one of the most important aspects of a Data Warehouse. When data passes from the sources of the application-oriented operational environment to the Data Warehouse, possible inconsistencies and redundancies should be resolved, so that the warehouse is able to provide an integrated and reconciled view of data of the organization. We describe a novel approach to data integration in Data Warehousing. Our approach is based on a conceptual representation of the Data Warehouse application domain, and follows the so-called local-as-view paradigm: both source and Data Warehouse relations are defined as views over the conceptual model. We propose a technique for declaratively specifying suitable reconciliation correspondences to be used in order to solve conflicts among data in different sources. The main goal of the method is to support the design of mediators that materialize the data in the Data Warehouse relations. Starting from the specification of one such relation as a query over the conceptual model, a rewriting algorithm reformulates the query in terms of both the source relations and the reconciliation correspondences, thus obtaining a correct specification of how to load the data in the materialized view.

We investigate the problem of reasoning in the propositional fragment of MBNF, the logic of minimal belief and negation as failure introduced by Lifschitz, which can be considered as a unifying framework for several nonmonotonic formalisms, including default logic, autoepistemic logic, circumscription, epistemic queries, and logic programming. We characterize the complexity and provide algorithms for reasoning in propositional MBNF. In particular, we show that entailment in propositional MBNF lies at the third level of the polynomial hierarchy, hence it is harder than reasoning in all the above mentioned propositional formalisms for nonmonotonic reasoning. We also prove the exact correspondence between negation as failure in MBNF and negative introspection in Moore's autoepistemic logic.

We describe an approach to reasoning agents which is based on a formal theory of actions and is actually implemented on a mobile robot working in an office environment. From an epistemiological viewpoint, our proposal is originated by the correspondence between Dynamic Logics and Description Logics, Specifically, we consider an epistemic extension of Description Logics to provide a new theoretical framework for the representation of dynamic systems, where the agent's reasoning is based on its knowledge about the world. In this setting, we obtain a weaker notion of logical inference, thus simplifying the reasoning task. From a practical viewpoint, we use a general purpose knowledge representation system based on Description Logics and its associated reasoning tools, in order to plan the actions of the mobile robot 'Tino', starting from the knowledge about the environment and the action specification. In addition, we exploit the robot's capabilities in order to integrate the execution of the plan with reactive behaviours, thus enabling the agent to accomplish its tasks in the real world.

Information integration is one of the core problems in cooperative information systems. The authors argue that two critical factors for the design and maintenance of applications requiring information integration are conceptual modeling of the domain, and reasoning support over the conceptual representation. In particular they present a general architecture for information integration that explicitly includes a conceptual representation of the application. They illustrate how the architecture can express several integration settings and existing systems. They provide various arguments in favor of the conceptual level in the architecture and of automated reasoning over the conceptual representation. Finally, they present a specific proposal of an integration system which realizes the general architecture and is equipped with decidable reasoning procedures.

In this paper we address ground logics, a family of nonmonotonic modal logics, and their usage in knowledge representation. In such a setting non-modal sentences are used to represent the knowledge of an agent about the world, while an epistemic operator provides the agent with autoepistemic or introspective knowledge. Ground logics are based on the idea of characterizing the knowledge of the agent by allowing it to make nonmonotonic assumptions only with respect to the knowledge about the world, i.e. expressed by nonmodal formulae. They are characterized by a fix-point equation which determines the set of formulae derivable from the agent's initial knowledge and which can be applied to different normal modal systems to obtain a variety of nonmonotonic modal logics. In the paper we address the semantical, computational and epistemological properties of ground logics. We provide a semantic characterization of ground logics by defining a preference relation on possible-world models based on the minimization of the knowledge expressed by nonmodal formulae. We analyse the computational complexity of reasoning in ground logics, providing both a lower bound through a reduction from quantified Boolean formulae and an upper bound through an algorithm for computing logical entailment. We discuss the representational features of ground logics, in particular defaults, and provide a thorough comparison with McDermott and Doyle's logics.