Using Description Logics for RDF Constraint Checking and Closed-World Recognition

RDF and Description Logics work in an open-world setting where absence of information is not information about absence. Nevertheless, Description Logic axioms can be interpreted in a closed-world setting and in this setting they can be used for both constraint checking and closed-world recognition against information sources. When the information sources are expressed in well-behaved RDF or RDFS (i.e., RDF graphs interpreted in the RDF or RDFS semantics) this constraint checking and closed-world recognition is simple to describe. Further this constraint checking can be implemented as SPARQL querying and thus effectively performed.Comment: Extended version of a paper of the same name that will appear in AAAI-201

Compliance checking in reified IO logic via SHACL

Reified Input/Output (I/O) logic[21] has been recently proposed to model real-world norms in terms of the logic in [11]. This is massively grounded on the notion of reification, and it has specifically designed to model meaning of natural language sentences, such as the ones occurring in existing legislation. This paper presents a methodology to carry out compliance checking on reified I/O logic formulae. These are translated in SHACL (Shapes Constraint Language) shapes, a recent W3C recommendation to validate and reason with RDF triplestores. Compliance checking is then enforced by validating RDF graphs describing states of affairs with respect to these SHACL shapes

Answering SPARQL queries modulo RDF Schema with paths

SPARQL is the standard query language for RDF graphs. In its strict instantiation, it only offers querying according to the RDF semantics and would thus ignore the semantics of data expressed with respect to (RDF) schemas or (OWL) ontologies. Several extensions to SPARQL have been proposed to query RDF data modulo RDFS, i.e., interpreting the query with RDFS semantics and/or considering external ontologies. We introduce a general framework which allows for expressing query answering modulo a particular semantics in an homogeneous way. In this paper, we discuss extensions of SPARQL that use regular expressions to navigate RDF graphs and may be used to answer queries considering RDFS semantics. We also consider their embedding as extensions of SPARQL. These SPARQL extensions are interpreted within the proposed framework and their drawbacks are presented. In particular, we show that the PSPARQL query language, a strict extension of SPARQL offering transitive closure, allows for answering SPARQL queries modulo RDFS graphs with the same complexity as SPARQL through a simple transformation of the queries. We also consider languages which, in addition to paths, provide constraints. In particular, we present and compare nSPARQL and our proposal CPSPARQL. We show that CPSPARQL is expressive enough to answer full SPARQL queries modulo RDFS. Finally, we compare the expressiveness and complexity of both nSPARQL and the corresponding fragment of CPSPARQL, that we call cpSPARQL. We show that both languages have the same complexity through cpSPARQL, being a proper extension of SPARQL graph patterns, is more expressive than nSPARQL.Comment: RR-8394; alkhateeb2003

Shape Expressions Schemas

We present Shape Expressions (ShEx), an expressive schema language for RDF designed to provide a high-level, user friendly syntax with intuitive semantics. ShEx allows to describe the vocabulary and the structure of an RDF graph, and to constrain the allowed values for the properties of a node. It includes an algebraic grouping operator, a choice operator, cardinalitiy constraints for the number of allowed occurrences of a property, and negation. We define the semantics of the language and illustrate it with examples. We then present a validation algorithm that, given a node in an RDF graph and a constraint defined by the ShEx schema, allows to check whether the node satisfies that constraint. The algorithm outputs a proof that contains trivially verifiable associations of nodes and the constraints that they satisfy. The structure can be used for complex post-processing tasks, such as transforming the RDF graph to other graph or tree structures, verifying more complex constraints, or debugging (w.r.t. the schema). We also show the inherent difficulty of error identification of ShEx

Evaluating Knowledge Representation and Reasoning Capabilites of Ontology Specification Languages

The interchange of ontologies across the World Wide Web (WWW) and the cooperation among heterogeneous agents placed on it is the main reason for the development of a new set of ontology specification languages, based on new web standards such as XML or RDF. These languages (SHOE, XOL, RDF, OIL, etc) aim to represent the knowledge contained in an ontology in a simple and human-readable way, as well as allow for the interchange of ontologies across the web. In this paper, we establish a common framework to compare the expressiveness of "traditional" ontology languages (Ontolingua, OKBC, OCML, FLogic, LOOM) and "web-based" ontology languages. As a result of this study, we conclude that different needs in KR and reasoning may exist in the building of an ontology-based application, and these needs must be evaluated in order to choose the most suitable ontology language(s)

Verification and Validation of Semantic Annotations

In this paper, we propose a framework to perform verification and validation of semantically annotated data. The annotations, extracted from websites, are verified against the schema.org vocabulary and Domain Specifications to ensure the syntactic correctness and completeness of the annotations. The Domain Specifications allow checking the compliance of annotations against corresponding domain-specific constraints. The validation mechanism will detect errors and inconsistencies between the content of the analyzed schema.org annotations and the content of the web pages where the annotations were found.Comment: Accepted for the A.P. Ershov Informatics Conference 2019(the PSI Conference Series, 12th edition) proceedin

Semantics and Validation of Shapes Schemas for RDF

We present a formal semantics and proof of soundness for shapes schemas, an expressive schema language for RDF graphs that is the foundation of Shape Expressions Language 2.0. It can be used to describe the vocabulary and the structure of an RDF graph, and to constrain the admissible properties and values for nodes in that graph. The language defines a typing mechanism called shapes against which nodes of the graph can be checked. It includes an algebraic grouping operator, a choice operator and cardinality constraints for the number of allowed occurrences of a property. Shapes can be combined using Boolean operators, and can use possibly recursive references to other shapes. We describe the syntax of the language and define its semantics. The semantics is proven to be well-defined for schemas that satisfy a reasonable syntactic restriction, namely stratified use of negation and recursion. We present two algorithms for the validation of an RDF graph against a shapes schema. The first algorithm is a direct implementation of the semantics, whereas the second is a non-trivial improvement. We also briefly give implementation guidelines

Correcting Knowledge Base Assertions

The usefulness and usability of knowledge bases (KBs) is often limited by quality issues. One common issue is the presence of erroneous assertions, often caused by lexical or semantic confusion. We study the problem of correcting such assertions, and present a general correction framework which combines lexical matching, semantic embedding, soft constraint mining and semantic consistency checking. The framework is evaluated using DBpedia and an enterprise medical KB