china 2009 语义网与本体技术系列讲座 iii 专题研究 research topics 黄智生 zhisheng...
Post on 21-Dec-2015
260 views
TRANSCRIPT
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 1
语义网与本体技术系列讲座 III专题研究
Research Topics
黄智生
Zhisheng Huang
Vrije University Amsterdam
The Netherlands
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 2
语义网与本体技术系列讲座
• 第一部分:导论2009 年 9 月 9 日星期三 14 : 00-15 : 30
• 第二部分:逻辑基础2009 年 9 月 12 日星期六 10 : 00-11 : 30
• 第三部分:专题研究2009 年 9 月 13 日星期日 9 : 00-10 : 30
------------------------------------------------------------ LarKC 人员专题讨论2009 年 9 月 13 日星期日 14 : 00-15 : 30
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 3
Outline
• 本体推理与管理 (Reasoning and Management of Ontologies)
• 不一致性本体的推理( Reasoning with Inconsistent Ontologies)
• 海量语义数据推理 (Scalable Reasoning)
• 结论和讨论 (Conclusion and Discussion)
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 4
Change
Query Answer
Query Answer
Diagnosis and Repair
Reasoningwith inconsistent ontologies
Incremental Ontology Evolution
+
+
=
=
+ =
Ontology Reasoning and Inconsistency Management
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 5
Inconsistency and the Semantic Web
• The Semantic Web is characterized by
• scalability,
• distribution, and
• multi-authorship
• All these may introduce inconsistencies.
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 6
Ontologies will be inconsistent
Because of:
• mistreatment of defaults
• polysemy
• migration from another formalism
• integration of multiple sources
• …
(“Semantic Web as a wake-up call for KR”)
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 7
Example: Inconsistency by mistreatment of default
rulesMadCow Ontology• Cow Vegetarian• MadCow Cow• MadCow Eat.BrainofSheep• Sheep Animal• Vegetarian Eat. (Animal PartofAnimal)• Brain PartofAnimal• ......• theMadCow MadCow• ...
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 8
Example: Inconsistency through imigration
from other formalism
DICE Ontology
• Brain CentralNervousSystem• Brain BodyPart• CentralNervousSystem NervousSystem• BodyPart NervousSystem
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 9
Inconsistency and Explosion
• The classical entailment is explosive:P, ¬ P |= Q
Any formula is a logical consequence of a contradiction.
• The conclusions derived from an inconsistent ontology using the standard reasoning may be completely meaningless
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 10
Why DL reasoning cannot escape the explosion
• The derivation checking is usually achieved by the satisfiability checking.
|= {¬} is not satisfiable.
• Tableau algorithms are approaches based on the satisfiability checking
is inconsistent => is not satisfiable => {¬} is not satisfiable.
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 11
Two main approaches to deal with inconsistency
• Inconsistency Diagnosis and Repair• Ontology Diagnosis(Schlobach and Cornet 2003)
• Reasoning with Inconsistency• Paraconsistent logics• Limited inference (Levesque 1989)• Approximate reasoning(Schaerf and Cadoli 1995)• Resource-bounded inferences(Marquis et al.2003)• Belief revision on relevance (Chopra et al. 2000)
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 12
What an inconsistency reasoner is expected
• Given an inconsistent ontology, return meaningful answers to queries.
• General solution: Use non-standard reasoning to deal with inconsistency
|= : the standard inference relations
| : nonstandard inference relations
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 13
Reasoning with inconsistent ontologies: Main Idea
Starting from the query, 1. select consistent sub-theory by using a
relevance-based selection function.
2. apply standard reasoning on the selected sub-theory to find meaningful answers.
3. If it cannot give a satisfying answer, the selection function would relax the relevance degree to extend consistent sub-theory for further reasoning.
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 14
New formal notions are needed
• New notions:• Accepted:• Rejected:• Overdetermined:• Undetermined:
• Soundness: (only classically justified results)
• Meaningfulness: (sound & never overdetermined)
soundness +
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 15
• Soundness: | =>` (` consistent and `|=).
• Meaningfulness: sound and consistent ( | => ¬).
• Local Completeness w.r.t a consistent ` : (`|= => |).
• Maximality: locally complete w.r.t a maximal consistent set `.
• Local Soundness w.r.t.a consistent set `: | => `|=).
Some Formal Definitions
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 16
Selection Functions
Given an ontology T and a query , a selection function s(T,,k)returns a subset of the ontology at each step k>0.
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 17
General framework
Use selection function s(T,,k),with s(T,,k) s(T,,k+1)
1. Start with k=0: s(T,,0) |= or s(T,,0) |= ?
2. Increase k, untils(T,,k) |= or s(T,,k) |=
3. Abort when• undetermined at maximal k• overdetermined at some k
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 18
Inconsistency Reasoning Processing: Linear
Extension
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 19
Proposition: Linear Extension
• Never over-determined• May undetermined• Always sound• Always meaningful• Always locally complete• May not maximal• Always locally sound
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 20
Direct Relevance and K Relevance
• Direct relevance (0-relevance). • there is a common name in two formulas:
C() C() R() R() I() I().
• K-relevance: there exist formulas 0, 1,…, k such that
and 0, 0 and 1 , …, k and
are directly relevant.
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 21
Relevance-based Selection Functions
• s(T,,0)=• s(T,,1)=
{ T: is directly relevant to }.
• s(T,,k)= { T: is directly relevant to s(T,,k-1)}.
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 22
PION Prototype
PION: Processing Inconsistent ONtologies
http://wasp.cs.vu.nl/sekt/pion
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 23
An Extended DIG Description Logic Interface
for Prolog (XDIG)• A logic programming infrastructure
for the Semantic Web
• Similar to SOAP
• Application independent, platform independent
• Support for DIG clients and DIG servers.
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 24
XDIG
• As a DIG client, the Prolog programs can call any external DL reasoner which supports the DIG DL interface.
• As a DIG server, the Prolog programs can serve as a DL reasoner, which can be used to support additional reasoning processing, like inconsistency reasoning multi-version reasoning, and inconsistency diagnosis and repair.
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 25
XDIG package
• The XDIG package and the source code are now available for public download at the website: http://wasp.cs.vu.nl/sekt/dig/
• In the package, we offer five examples how XDIG can be used to develop extended DL reasoners.
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 26
PION Testbed
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 27
Answer Evaluation
• Intended Answer (IA): PION answer = Intuitive Answer
• Cautious Answer (CA): PION answer is ‘undetermined’, but intuitive answer is ‘accepted’ or ‘rejected’.
• Reckless Answer (RA): PION answer is ‘accepted’ or ‘rejected’, but intuitive answer is ‘undetermined’.
• Counter Intuitive Answer (CIA): PION answer is ‘accepted’ but intuitive answer is ‘rejected’, or vice verse.
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 28
Preliminary Tests with Syntactic-relevance Selection Function
Ontology Queries IA CA RA CIA IA (%)
ICR (%)
Bird 50 50 0 0 0 100 100
Brain (DICE)
42 36 4 2 0 85.7 100
MarriedWoman
50 48 0 2 0 96 100
MadCow 254 236 16 0 2 92.9 99
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 29
Intensive Tests on PION
• Evaluation and test on PION with several realistic ontologies:• Communication Ontology• Transportation Ontology • MadCow Ontology
Each ontology has been tested by thousands of queries with different selection functions.
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 30
Summary
• we proposed a general framework for reasoning with inconsistent ontologies
• based on selecting ever increasing consistent subsets
• choice of selection function is crucial• query-based selection functions are
flexible to find intended answers• simple syntactic selection works
surprisingly well
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 31
Extension
•Semantic Relevance Based Selection Functions
•K-extension
• Variants of over-determined processing strategies
• Integrating with the diagnosis approach
http://www.larkc.eu/ 32
Using Semantic Distances for Reasoning with Inconsistent
Ontologies
• Google distances are used to develop semantic relevance functions to reason with inconsistent ontologies.
• Assumption: two concepts appear more frequently in the same web page, they are semantically more similar (relevant).
http://www.larkc.eu/ 33
Google Distances (Cilibrasi and Vitanyi 2004)
• Google distance is measured in terms of the co-occurrence of two search items in the Web by Google search engine.
• Normalized Google Distance (NGD) is introduced to measure the similarity/light-weight semantic relevance
• NGD(x,y)= (max{log f(x), log f(y)}-log f(x,y))/(log M-min{log f(x),log f(y)}
where
f(x) is the number of Google hits for x
f(x,y) is the number of Google hits for the tuple of search items x and y
M is the number of web pages indexed by Google.
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 34
Semantic Distances
• Define semantic distances (SD) between two formulas in terms of semantic distances between two concepts/roles/individuals (NGD)
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 35
Postulates for Semantic Distances
http://www.larkc.eu/ 36
Semantic Distances
Semantic distance are measured by the ratio of the summed distance of the difference between two formulae to the maximal distance between two formulae.
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 37
Proposition
• The semantic distance SD satisfies the properties Range, Reflexivity, Symmetry, Maximum Distance, and Intermediate Values.
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 38
Example: MadCow
NGD(MadCow, Grass)=0.7229
NGD(MadCow, Sheep)=0.6120
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 39
Implementation: PION
PION: Processing Inconsistent ONtologies
http://wasp.cs.vu.nl/sekt/pion
http://www.larkc.eu/ 40
Answer Evaluation• Intended Answer (IA):
Query answer = Intuitive Answer • Cautious Answer (CA):
Query answer is ‘undetermined’, but Intutitve answer is ‘accepted’ or ‘rejected’.
• Reckless Answer (RA): Query answer is ‘accepted’ or ‘rejected’, but Intutive answer is ‘undetermined’.
• Counter Intuitive Answer (CIA): Query answer is ‘accepted’ but Intuitive answer is ‘rejected’, or vice versa.
http://www.larkc.eu/ 41
Syntactic approach vs. Semantic approach: quality
of query answers
http://www.larkc.eu/ 42
Syntactic approach vs. Semantic approach: Time Performance
http://www.larkc.eu/ 43
Summary
• The run-time of the semantic approach is much better than the syntactic approach, while the quality remains comparable.
• The semantic approach can be parameterised so as to stepwise further improve the run-time with only a very small drop in quality.
http://www.larkc.eu/ 44
Summary (cont.)
• The semantic approach for reasoning with inconsistent ontologies trade-off computational cost for inferential completeness, and provide attractive scalability.
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 45
LarKC: 一个海量语义数据处理平台
• The Large Knowledge Collider ( 大型知识对撞机)
A configurable platform
for experimentation
by others
• http://www.larkc.eu
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 46
可布局平台“ Configurable
platform”“a configurable platform for infinitely scalable semantic web reasoning”.
Enrich current logic-based Semantic Web reasoning with methods from information retrieval, machine learning, information theory, databases, and probabilistic reasoning
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 47
网络科学与人类智能科学的结合Web Science with Human
Intelligence• Employing cognitively inspired
approaches and techniques such as spreading activation, focus of attention, reinforcement, habituation, relevance reasoning, and bounded rationality
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 48
Achieve scalability through giving up
completeness • by giving up 100% correctness:
• trading quality for size• often completeness is not needed• sometimes even correctness is not needed
pre
cisi
on
(sou
ndn
ess
)
recall (completeness)
logic
IR
Semantic Web
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 49
通过并行计算达到海量数据处理能力Achieve Scalability through
Parallelization
• by parallelisation:• cluster computing
• wide area distribution “Thinking@home”, “self-computing semantic Web”
• cloud computing 云计算 (Amazon , Google)
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 50
欧盟第七框架研究课题 : LarKCEU 7th framework Project
• 总预算 1 千万欧元: 10M€ budget • 历时 3 年半: 3.5 years• 八十个人年: 80 person years• 3 个实例研究: 3 case studies• 14 个合作单位: 14 partners,
来自 12 个国家: 12 countries,来自 3 大洲: 3 continents
• project nr. FP7 – 215535
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 51
The consortium
50 people present
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 52
The Consortium
• Combining consortium competence• IR, Cognition• ML, Ontologies• Statistics, ML,
Cognition,DB• Logic,DB,
Probabilistic Inference• Economics,
Decision Theory
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 53
课题组成Project Workpackages
WP1 – Conceptual Framework & Evaluation
WP 2: Retrieval and Selection
WP5: Collider Platform
WP
9:
Ex
plo
ita
tio
n a
nd
s
tan
da
rds
WP
10
: P
roje
ct
Ma
na
ge
me
nt
WP
8:
Tra
inin
g,
dis
se
min
ati
on
, c
om
mu
nit
y
bu
ild
ing
WP3: Abstraction and Learning
WP4: Reasoning and Deciding
WP 6: Use case: Real Time City
WP 7a: Use case: Early Clinical Development
WP 7b: Use case: Carcinogenesis
Reference Production
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 54
Use case: Drug Discovery
• Problem: pharmaceutical R&D in early clinical development is stagnating
(Q1Q2Q3)
FDA white paper Innovation or Stagnation (March 2004):
“developers have no choice but to use the tools of the last century to assess this century's candidate solutions.”
“industry scientists often lack cross-cutting information about anentire product area, or information about techniques that may be used in areas other than theirs”
FDA white paper Innovation or Stagnation (March 2004):
“developers have no choice but to use the tools of the last century to assess this century's candidate solutions.”
“industry scientists often lack cross-cutting information about anentire product area, or information about techniques that may be used in areas other than theirs”
“Show me any potential liver toxicity associated with the compound’s drug class, target, structure and disease.”
Show me all liver toxicity associated with the target or the pathway.
Genetics
1Q“Show me all liver toxicity associated with compounds with similar structure”
Chemistry
2Q
“Show me all liver toxicity from the public literature and internal reports that are related to the drug class, disease and patient population”LITERATURE
3Q
Current NCBI: linking but no inference
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 55
Use Case: Real Time City• Our cities face many challenges • Urban Computing
is the ICT way to address them
• How can we redevelop existing neighborhoods and business districts to improve the quality of life?
• How can we create more choices in housing, accommodating diverse lifestyles and all income levels?
• How can we reduce traffic congestion yet stay connected?
• How can we include citizens in planning their communities rather than limiting input to only those affected by the next project?
• How can we fund schools, bridges, roads, and clean water while meeting short-term costs of increased security?
• How can we redevelop existing neighborhoods and business districts to improve the quality of life?
• How can we create more choices in housing, accommodating diverse lifestyles and all income levels?
• How can we reduce traffic congestion yet stay connected?
• How can we include citizens in planning their communities rather than limiting input to only those affected by the next project?
• How can we fund schools, bridges, roads, and clean water while meeting short-term costs of increased security?
Is public transportation where the people are?Is public transportation where the people are?
Which landmarks attract more people?Which landmarks attract more people?
Where are people concentrating?Where are people concentrating?
Where is traffic moving?Where is traffic moving?
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 56
课题时间表 Project Timeline
• Surveys (plugins, platform)• Requirements (use cases)
Prototype Internal Release Public Release Final Release
Use Cases V1
Use Cases V2
Use Cases V3
420 6 18 3310
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 57
如果你对参与开发感兴趣的话How can any other interested party
contribute?• The Large Knowledge Collider is an
open, and configurable platform.
• The first public version of the Large Knowledge Collider is available.
• LarKC has formed an "early adapters group". LarKC will actively support this group in use the Large Knowledge Collider platform.
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 58
LarKC 中文论坛http://groups.google.com/group/larkc-
chinese-forum
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 59
Realising the Architecture
PipelineSupportSystem
PipelineSupportSystem
Plug-in RegistryPlug-in
Registry
Plug-in ManagerPlug-in Manager
Data LayerData Layer
Plug-in APIPlug-in API
Data Layer APIData Layer APIRDF
StoreRDF
Store
59
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 60
Data Layer APIData Layer API
PipelineSupportSystem
PipelineSupportSystem
Plug-in RegistryPlug-in
Registry
RDFStoreRDF
StoreRDF
StoreRDF
StoreRDF
StoreRDF
StoreRDFDocRDFDoc
RDFDocRDFDoc
Data LayerData Layer
DeciderDecider
Plug-in APIPlug-in API
Plug-in ManagerPlug-in Manager
QueryTransformer
QueryTransformer
Plug-in APIPlug-in API
Plug-in ManagerPlug-in Manager
IdentifierIdentifier
Plug-in APIPlug-in API
Plug-in ManagerPlug-in Manager
Info. SetTransformer
Info. SetTransformer
Plug-in APIPlug-in API
Plug-in ManagerPlug-in Manager
SelecterSelecter
Plug-in APIPlug-in API
Plug-in ManagerPlug-in Manager
ReasonerReasoner
Plug-in APIPlug-in API
ApplicationApplication
RDFDocRDFDoc
Platform Utility Functionality
APIs
Plug-ins
External systems
External data sources
LarKC Architecture
60
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 61
LarKC Plug-in API: General Plug-in Model
• Plug-ins are identified by a URI (Uniform Resource Identifier)
• Plug-ins provide MetaData about what they do (Functional properties): e.g. type = Selecter
• Plug-ins provide information about their behaviour and needs, including Quality of Service information (Non-functional properties): e.g. Throughput, MinMemory, Cost,…
+ URI getIdentifier()+ QoSInformation getQoSInformation()
+ URI getIdentifier()+ QoSInformation getQoSInformation()
Plug-inPlug-in
Functional propertiesNon-functional propertiesWSDL description
Functional propertiesNon-functional propertiesWSDL description
Plug-in description
61
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 62
LarKC Plug-in API: IDENTIFY
• IDENTIFY: Given a query, identify resources that could be used to answer it• Sindice – Triple Pattern Query RDF Graphs
• Google – Keyword Query Natural Language Document
• Triple Store – SPARQL Query RDF Graphs
+ Collection<InformationSet> identify(Query theQuery, Contract contract, Context context)
+ Collection<InformationSet> identify(Query theQuery, Contract contract, Context context)
Identifier Identifier
62
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 63
LarKC Plug-in API: TRANSFORM (1/2)
• Query TRANSFORM: Transforms a query from one representation to another • SPARQL Query Triple Pattern Query
• SPARQL Query Keyword Query
• SPARQL Query SPARQL Query (different abstraction)
• SQARQL Query CycL Query
+ Set<Query> transform(Query theQuery, Contract theContract, Context theContext)+ Set<Query> transform(Query theQuery, Contract theContract, Context theContext)
QueryTransformerQueryTransformer
63
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 64
LarKC Plug-in API: TRANSFORM (2/2)
• Information Set TRANSFORM: Transforms data from one representation to another• Natural Language Document RDF Graph
• Structured Data Sources RDF Graph
• RDF Graph RDF Graph (e.g. foaf vocabulary to facebook vocabulary)
+ InformationSet transform(InformationSet theInformationSet, Contract theContract, Context theContext)
+ InformationSet transform(InformationSet theInformationSet, Contract theContract, Context theContext)
InformationSetTransformerInformationSetTransformer
64
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 65
LarKC Plug-in API: SELECT
• SELECT: Given a set of statements (e.g. a number of RDF Graphs) will choose a selection/sample from this set• Collection of RDF Graphs Triple Set (Merged)
• Collection of RDF Graphs Triple Set (10% of each)
• Collection of RDF Graphs Triple Set (N Triples)
+ SetOfStatements select(SetOfStatements theSetOfStatements, Contract contract,
Context context)
+ SetOfStatements select(SetOfStatements theSetOfStatements, Contract contract,
Context context)
SelecterSelecter
65
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 66
LarKC Plug-in API: REASON
• REASON: Executes a query against the supplied set of statements• SPARQL Query Variable Binding (Select)
• SPARQL Query Set of statements (Construct)
• SPARQL Query Set of statements (Describe)
• SPARQL Query Boolean (Ask)
+ VariableBinding sparqlSelect(SPARQLQuery theQuery, SetOfStatements theSetOfStatements, Contract contract, Context context)
+ SetOfStatements sparqlConstruct(SPARQLQuery theQuery, SetOfStatements theSetOfStatements, Contract contract, Context context)
+ SetOfStatements sparqlDescribe(SPARQLQuery theQuery, SetOfStatements theSetOfStatements, Contract contract, Context context)
+ BooleanInformationSet sparqlAsk(SPARQLQuery theQuery, SetOfStatements theSetOfStatements, Contract contract, Context context)
+ VariableBinding sparqlSelect(SPARQLQuery theQuery, SetOfStatements theSetOfStatements, Contract contract, Context context)
+ SetOfStatements sparqlConstruct(SPARQLQuery theQuery, SetOfStatements theSetOfStatements, Contract contract, Context context)
+ SetOfStatements sparqlDescribe(SPARQLQuery theQuery, SetOfStatements theSetOfStatements, Contract contract, Context context)
+ BooleanInformationSet sparqlAsk(SPARQLQuery theQuery, SetOfStatements theSetOfStatements, Contract contract, Context context)
ReasonerReasoner
66
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 67
LarKC Plug-in API: DECIDE
• DECIDE: Builds the pipeline and manages the control flow• Scripted Decider: Predefined pipeline is built and executed
• Self-configuring Decider: Uses plug-in descriptions (functional and non-functional properties) to build the pipeline
+ VariableBinding sparqlSelect(SPARQLQuery theQuery, QoSParameters theQoSParameters)
+ SetOfStatements sparqlConstruct(SPARQLQuery theQuery, QoSParameters theQoSParameters)
+ SetOfStatements sparqlDescribe(SPARQLQuery theQuery, QoSParameters theQoSParameters)
+ BooleanInformationSet sparqlAsk(SPARQLQuery theQuery, QoSParameters theQoSParameters)
+ VariableBinding sparqlSelect(SPARQLQuery theQuery, QoSParameters theQoSParameters)
+ SetOfStatements sparqlConstruct(SPARQLQuery theQuery, QoSParameters theQoSParameters)
+ SetOfStatements sparqlDescribe(SPARQLQuery theQuery, QoSParameters theQoSParameters)
+ BooleanInformationSet sparqlAsk(SPARQLQuery theQuery, QoSParameters theQoSParameters)
DeciderDecider
67
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 68
DeciderDecider
Plug-in APIPlug-in API
Plug-in ManagerPlug-in Manager
QueryTransformer
QueryTransformer
Plug-in APIPlug-in API
Plug-in ManagerPlug-in Manager
IdentifierIdentifier
Plug-in APIPlug-in API
Plug-in ManagerPlug-in Manager
Info. SetTransformer
Info. SetTransformer
Plug-in APIPlug-in API
Plug-in ManagerPlug-in Manager
SelecterSelecter
Plug-in APIPlug-in API
Plug-in ManagerPlug-in Manager
ReasonerReasoner
Plug-in APIPlug-in API
Plug-in RegistryPlug-in Registry
PipelineSupportSystem
PipelineSupportSystem
RDFStoreRDF
Store
IdentifierIdentifier Info Set Transformer
Info Set Transformer ReasonerReasoner
DeciderDecider
SelecterSelecterQueryTransformer
QueryTransformer
What does a pipeline look like?
68
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 69
LarKC Data Model :Transport By
Reference
RDF Graph
RDF Graph
RDF Graph
RDF Graph
RDF Graph
RDF Graph
Default Graph
RDF Graph
RDF Graph
RDF Graph
RDF Graph
RDF Graph
RDF Graph
RDF Graph
Dataset: Collectionof named graphs
Labeled Set: Pointers to data
Current Scale: O(1010) triples
69
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 70
LarKC Platform and the DIG plug-in
LarKC Platform
DIG InterfacePlug-in
Racer
FACT++
KAON2
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 71
Tasks of the DIG Plug-in
1. Translate a set of statements (ontology data) into a DIG data. If it is OWL-DL data, the use the OWL2DIG library to translate it into a DIG data
2. Translate SPARQL(DL) query into DIG
- deal with triple-encoded DL expressions
3. Query processing and answer checking
4. Translate DIG answers into SPARQL answers
71footer18/04/23
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 72
LarKC Platform and the DIG plug-in
LarKC Platform
DIG InterfacePlug-in
ExternalDIG Reasoner
Ontology (URI)/Set of Statements
Tell
SPARQL query
Ask
Response
SPARQL Answer
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 73
The DIG plug-in (v0.3)Have been supported • Support the DIG interface 1.1.• Support Sparqlask and Sparqlselect.• DL Expressions (conjunction, disjunction, disjoint, negation)• DIG queries (subsumption, instance, instances)Have been tested with• Racer1.7.14• PION 2.1.0To be supported soon:• Complex DL concept expressions (such as nominal, min, max,
etc.) • Complex Sparql expressions (such as Filtering, Optional, Regular
expressions, sparqlconstruct, sparqldescribe, etc.) • Complex DIG queries (role query, functional query, value pair
query)
China 2009 74
Why SPARQL-DL?
• SPARQL is too expressive for a DL reasoner can support.
• In SPARQL, there is no semantic interpretation for DL expressions such as owl:sameas, owl:disjointwith, etc.
• SPARQL-DL is a DL-specific SPARQL with some DL primitives, such as type(a, C), SubClassof(C1, C2), DisjointWith(C1,C2), ComplementOf(C1,C2),EquivalentClass(C1,C2),…(Sirin and Parsia 2007) QuickTime™ and a
decompressorare needed to see this picture.
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 75
Translation of DL expressions into RDF
triples • Using the OWL-DL method (Patel-
Schneider,Hayes, Horrocks 2004).
http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/mapping.html
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 76
SPARQL-DL Query Example 1
?- subClassOf(Wine, PotableLiquid)// to ask whether or not wine is a subclass of potable
liquid
PREFIX rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#>
PREFIX wine: <http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/PR-owl-guide-20031209/wine#>
PREFIX food: <http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/PR-owl-guide-20031209/food#>
ASK WHERE { wine:Wine rdfs:subClassOf
food:PotableLiquid.}
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 77
SPARQL-DL Query Example 2
?- subClassOf(Bordeaux, and(SweetWine, TableWine))
// to ask whether or not Bordeaux is a SweetWine and TableWine
PREFIX rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#>
PREFIX rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#>
……
PREFIX owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#>
ASK
wine:Bordeaux rdfs:subClassOf _:x.
_:x owl:interSectionOf _:y1.
_:y1 rdf:first wine:SweetWine.
_:y1 rdf:rest wine:TableWine.
wine:Bordeaux rdf:type owl:Class.}
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 78
Simple SPARQLSelect Query: Example 3
?- subClassOf(?X, Wine)
// to list all subconcepts of Wine
PREFIX rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#>
PREFIX wine: <http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/PR-owl-guide-20031209/wine#>
SELECT ?X
WHERE { ?X rdfs:subClassOf wine:Wine.}
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 79
SPARQL-DL Query Example 4
?- subClassOf(Bordeaux, ?X), subClassOf(?X,Wine),
subClassOf(?X,?Y).
PREFIX rdfs:http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#..
…..
PREFIX wine: <http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/PR-owl-guide-20031209/wine#>
SELECT ?X ?Y
WHERE {
wine:Bordeaux rdfs:subClassOf ?X.
?X rdfs:subClassOf wine:Wine.
?X rdfs:subClassOf ?Y.
?Y rdf:type owl:Class.}
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 80
PION and External DIG Reasoner
• PION needs an external DIG Reasoner for standard reasoning(i.e., non-inconsistency reasoning)
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 81
Compare it with that from a standard DL reasoner
• You can see that when querying an inconsistent ontology, the standard DL reasoner always returns an error message, like this:
<responses xmlns="http://dl.kr.org/dig/2003/02/lang" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-
instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://dl.kr.org/dig/2003/02/lang
http://dl-web.man.ac.uk/dig/2003/02/dig.xsd"> <error
id="http://wasp.cs.vu.nl/larkc/ontology/ex#themadcow http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type http://wasp.cs.vu.nl/larkc/ontolog/ex#vegetarian"
message="ABox http://dl.kr.org/dig/kb-1048 is incoherent."/>
</responses>
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 82
Various Strategies
• You can use the PION testbed page piontest2.htm to select different strategies for reasoning with inconsistent ontologies by PION:• selection functions (syntactic relevance,
concept syntactic relevance, or semantic relevance by Google distances),
• over-determed processing methods (first maximal consistent set, or path pruning with Google distances),
• extension strategies (linear extension or k-extension).
China 2009 http://www.larkc.eu/ 83
Questions and Discussions