BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Patrick Rodler

Patrick Rodler contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Artificial IntelligenceLogic in Computer ScienceData Structures and AlgorithmsHuman-Computer InteractionPerformance

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
9works
0followers
5topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

9 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

A New Expert Questioning Approach to More Efficient Fault Localization in Ontologies

When ontologies reach a certain size and complexity, faults such as inconsistencies, unsatisfiable classes or wrong entailments are hardly avoidable. Locating the incorrect axioms that cause these faults is a hard and time-consuming task. Addressing this issue, several techniques for semi-automatic fault localization in ontologies have been proposed. Often, these approaches involve a human expert who provides answers to system-generated questions about the intended (correct) ontology in order to reduce the possible fault locations. To suggest as informative questions as possible, existing methods draw on various algorithmic optimizations as well as heuristics. However, these computations are often based on certain assumptions about the interacting user. In this work, we characterize and discuss different user types and show that existing approaches do not achieve optimal efficiency for all of them. As a remedy, we suggest a new type of expert question which aims at fitting the answering behavior of all analyzed experts. Moreover, we present an algorithm to optimize this new query type which is fully compatible with the (tried and tested) heuristics used in the field. Experiments on faulty real-world ontologies show the potential of the new querying method for minimizing the expert consultation time, independent of the expert type. Besides, the gained insights can inform the design of interactive debugging tools towards better meeting their users' needs.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Are Query-Based Ontology Debuggers Really Helping Knowledge Engineers?

Real-world semantic or knowledge-based systems, e.g., in the biomedical domain, can become large and complex. Tool support for the localization and repair of faults within knowledge bases of such systems can therefore be essential for their practical success. Correspondingly, a number of knowledge base debugging approaches, in particular for ontology-based systems, were proposed throughout recent years. Query-based debugging is a comparably recent interactive approach that localizes the true cause of an observed problem by asking knowledge engineers a series of questions. Concrete implementations of this approach exist, such as the OntoDebug plug-in for the ontology editor Protégé. To validate that a newly proposed method is favorable over an existing one, researchers often rely on simulation-based comparisons. Such an evaluation approach however has certain limitations and often cannot fully inform us about a method's true usefulness. We therefore conducted different user studies to assess the practical value of query-based ontology debugging. One main insight from the studies is that the considered interactive approach is indeed more efficient than an alternative algorithmic debugging based on test cases. We also observed that users frequently made errors in the process, which highlights the importance of a careful design of the queries that users need to answer.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Do We Really Sample Right In Model-Based Diagnosis?

Statistical samples, in order to be representative, have to be drawn from a population in a random and unbiased way. Nevertheless, it is common practice in the field of model-based diagnosis to make estimations from (biased) best-first samples. One example is the computation of a few most probable possible fault explanations for a defective system and the use of these to assess which aspect of the system, if measured, would bring the highest information gain. In this work, we scrutinize whether these statistically not well-founded conventions, that both diagnosis researchers and practitioners have adhered to for decades, are indeed reasonable. To this end, we empirically analyze various sampling methods that generate fault explanations. We study the representativeness of the produced samples in terms of their estimations about fault explanations and how well they guide diagnostic decisions, and we investigate the impact of sample size, the optimal trade-off between sampling efficiency and effectivity, and how approximate sampling techniques compare to exact ones.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Evaluating Active Learning Heuristics for Sequential Diagnosis

Given a malfunctioning system, sequential diagnosis aims at identifying the root cause of the failure in terms of abnormally behaving system components. As initial system observations usually do not suffice to deterministically pin down just one explanation of the system's misbehavior, additional system measurements can help to differentiate between possible explanations. The goal is to restrict the space of explanations until there is only one (highly probable) explanation left. To achieve this with a minimal-cost set of measurements, various (active learning) heuristics for selecting the best next measurement have been proposed. We report preliminary results of extensive ongoing experiments with a set of selection heuristics on real-world diagnosis cases. In particular, we try to answer questions such as "Is some heuristic always superior to all others?", "On which factors does the (relative) performance of the particular heuristics depend?" or "Under which circumstances should I use which heuristic?"

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

On Expert Behaviors and Question Types for Efficient Query-Based Ontology Fault Localization

We challenge existing query-based ontology fault localization methods wrt. assumptions they make, criteria they optimize, and interaction means they use. We find that their efficiency depends largely on the behavior of the interacting expert, that performed calculations can be inefficient or imprecise, and that used optimization criteria are often not fully realistic. As a remedy, we suggest a novel (and simpler) interaction approach which overcomes all identified problems and, in comprehensive experiments on faulty real-world ontologies, enables a successful fault localization while requiring fewer expert interactions in 66 % of the cases, and always at least 80 % less expert waiting time, compared to existing methods.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

RBF-HS: Recursive Best-First Hitting Set Search

Various model-based diagnosis scenarios require the computation of most preferred fault explanations. Existing algorithms that are sound (i.e., output only actual fault explanations) and complete (i.e., can return all explanations), however, require exponential space to achieve this task. As a remedy, we propose two novel diagnostic search algorithms, called RBF-HS (Recursive Best-First Hitting Set Search) and HBF-HS (Hybrid Best-First Hitting Set Search), which build upon tried and tested techniques from the heuristic search domain. RBF-HS can enumerate an arbitrary predefined finite number of fault explanations in best-first order within linear space bounds, without sacrificing the desirable soundness or completeness properties. The idea of HBF-HS is to find a trade-off between runtime optimization and a restricted space consumption that does not exceed the available memory. In extensive experiments on real-world diagnosis cases we compared our approaches to Reiter's HS-Tree, a state-of-the-art method that gives the same theoretical guarantees and is as general(ly applicable) as the suggested algorithms. For the computation of minimum-cardinality fault explanations, we find that (1) RBF-HS reduces memory requirements substantially in most cases by up to several orders of magnitude, (2) in more than a third of the cases, both memory savings and runtime savings are achieved, and (3) given the runtime overhead is significant, using HBF-HS instead of RBF-HS reduces the runtime to values comparable with HS-Tree while keeping the used memory reasonably bounded. When computing most probable fault explanations, we observe that RBF-HS tends to trade memory savings more or less one-to-one for runtime overheads. Again, HBF-HS proves to be a reasonable remedy to cut down the runtime while complying with practicable memory bounds.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Sound, Complete, Linear-Space, Best-First Diagnosis Search

Various model-based diagnosis scenarios require the computation of the most preferred fault explanations. Existing algorithms that are sound (i.e., output only actual fault explanations) and complete (i.e., can return all explanations), however, require exponential space to achieve this task. As a remedy, to enable successful diagnosis on memory-restricted devices and for memory-intensive problem cases, we propose RBF-HS, a diagnostic search method based on Korf's well-known RBFS algorithm. RBF-HS can enumerate an arbitrary fixed number of fault explanations in best-first order within linear space bounds, without sacrificing the desirable soundness or completeness properties. Evaluations using real-world diagnosis cases show that RBF-HS, when used to compute minimum-cardinality fault explanations, in most cases saves substantial space (up to 98 %) while requiring only reasonably more or even less time than Reiter's HS-Tree, a commonly used and as generally applicable sound, complete and best-first diagnosis search.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

The Scheduling Job-Set Optimization Problem: A Model-Based Diagnosis Approach

A common issue for companies is that the volume of product orders may at times exceed the production capacity. We formally introduce two novel problems dealing with the question which orders to discard or postpone in order to meet certain (timeliness) goals, and try to approach them by means of model-based diagnosis. In thorough analyses, we identify many similarities of the introduced problems to diagnosis problems, but also reveal crucial idiosyncracies and outline ways to handle or leverage them. Finally, a proof-of-concept evaluation on industrial-scale problem instances from a well-known scheduling benchmark suite demonstrates that one of the two formalized problems can be well attacked by out-of-the-box model-based diagnosis tools.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Understanding the QuickXPlain Algorithm: Simple Explanation and Formal Proof

In his seminal paper of 2004, Ulrich Junker proposed the QuickXPlain algorithm, which provides a divide-and-conquer computation strategy to find within a given set an irreducible subset with a particular (monotone) property. Beside its original application in the domain of constraint satisfaction problems, the algorithm has since then found widespread adoption in areas as different as model-based diagnosis, recommender systems, verification, or the Semantic Web. This popularity is due to the frequent occurrence of the problem of finding irreducible subsets on the one hand, and to QuickXPlain's general applicability and favorable computational complexity on the other hand. However, although (we regularly experience) people are having a hard time understanding QuickXPlain and seeing why it works correctly, a proof of correctness of the algorithm has never been published. This is what we account for in this work, by explaining QuickXPlain in a novel tried and tested way and by presenting an intelligible formal proof of it. Apart from showing the correctness of the algorithm and excluding the later detection of errors (proof and trust effect), the added value of the availability of a formal proof is, e.g., (i) that the workings of the algorithm often become completely clear only after studying, verifying and comprehending the proof (didactic effect), (ii) the shown proof methodology can be used as a guidance for proving other recursive algorithms (transfer effect), and (iii) the possibility of providing "gapless" correctness proofs of systems that rely on (results computed by) QuickXPlain, such as numerous model-based debuggers (completeness effect).

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access