Iteratively Learning Embeddings and Rules for Knowledge Graph Reasoning

Reasoning is essential for the development of large knowledge graphs, especially for completion, which aims to infer new triples based on existing ones. Both rules and embeddings can be used for knowledge graph reasoning and they have their own advantages and difficulties. Rule-based reasoning is accurate and explainable but rule learning with searching over the graph always suffers from efficiency due to huge search space. Embedding-based reasoning is more scalable and efficient as the reasoning is conducted via computation between embeddings, but it has difficulty learning good representations for sparse entities because a good embedding relies heavily on data richness. Based on this observation, in this paper we explore how embedding and rule learning can be combined together and complement each other's difficulties with their advantages. We propose a novel framework IterE iteratively learning embeddings and rules, in which rules are learned from embeddings with proper pruning strategy and embeddings are learned from existing triples and new triples inferred by rules. Evaluations on embedding qualities of IterE show that rules help improve the quality of sparse entity embeddings and their link prediction results. We also evaluate the efficiency of rule learning and quality of rules from IterE compared with AMIE+, showing that IterE is capable of generating high quality rules more efficiently. Experiments show that iteratively learning embeddings and rules benefit each other during learning and prediction.Comment: This paper is accepted by WWW'1

RORS: Enhanced Rule-based OWL Reasoning on Spark

The rule-based OWL reasoning is to compute the deductive closure of an ontology by applying RDF/RDFS and OWL entailment rules. The performance of the rule-based OWL reasoning is often sensitive to the rule execution order. In this paper, we present an approach to enhancing the performance of the rule-based OWL reasoning on Spark based on a locally optimal executable strategy. Firstly, we divide all rules (27 in total) into four main classes, namely, SPO rules (5 rules), type rules (7 rules), sameAs rules (7 rules), and schema rules (8 rules) since, as we investigated, those triples corresponding to the first three classes of rules are overwhelming (e.g., over 99% in the LUBM dataset) in our practical world. Secondly, based on the interdependence among those entailment rules in each class, we pick out an optimal rule executable order of each class and then combine them into a new rule execution order of all rules. Finally, we implement the new rule execution order on Spark in a prototype called RORS. The experimental results show that the running time of RORS is improved by about 30% as compared to Kim & Park's algorithm (2015) using the LUBM200 (27.6 million triples).Comment: 12 page

Isolating Correct Reasoning

This paper tries to do three things. First, it tries to make it plausible that correct rules of reasoning do not always preserve justification: in other words, if you begin with a justified attitude, and reason correctly from that premise, it can nevertheless happen that you’ll nevertheless arrive at an unjustified attitude. Attempts to show that such cases in fact involve following an incorrect rule of reasoning cannot be vindicated. Second, it also argues that correct rules of reasoning do not even correspond to permissions of “structural rationality”: it is not always structurally permissible to base an attitude on other attitudes from which it follows by correct reasoning. Third, from these observations it tries to build a somewhat positive account of the correctness of rules of reasoning as a more sui generis notion irreducible to either justification or structural rationality. This account vindicates an important unity of theoretical and practical reasoning as well as a qualified version of the thesis that deductive logic supplies correct rules of reasoning

Visualization with hierarchically structured trees for an explanation reasoning system

This work is concerned with an application of drawing hierarchically structured trees. The tree drawing is applied to an explanation reasoning system. The reasoning is based on synthetic abduction (hypothesis) that gets a case from a rule and a result. In other words, the system searches a proper environment to get a desired result. In order that the system may be reliably related to the amount of rules which are used to get the answer, we visualize a process of reasoning to show how rules have concern with the process. Since the process of reasoning in the system makes a hierarchically structured tree, the visualization of reasoning is a drawing of a hierarchically structured tree. We propose a method of visualization that is applicable to the explanation reasoning system.</p

Reasoning with Data Flows and Policy Propagation Rules

Data-oriented systems and applications are at the centre of current developments of the World Wide Web. In these scenarios, assessing what policies propagate from the licenses of data sources to the output of a given data-intensive system is an important problem. Both policies and data flows can be described with Semantic Web languages. Although it is possible to define Policy Propagation Rules (PPR) by associating policies to data flow steps, this activity results in a huge number of rules to be stored and managed. In a recent paper, we introduced strategies for reducing the size of a PPR knowledge base by using an ontology of the possible relations between data objects, the Datanode ontology, and applying the (A)AAAA methodology, a knowledge engineering approach that exploits Formal Concept Analysis (FCA). In this article, we investigate whether this reasoning is feasible and how it can be performed. For this purpose, we study the impact of compressing a rule base associated with an inference mechanism on the performance of the reasoning process. Moreover, we report on an extension of the (A)AAAA methodology that includes a coherency check algorithm, that makes this reasoning possible. We show how this compression, in addition to being beneficial to the management of the knowledge base, also has a positive impact on the performance and resource requirements of the reasoning process for policy propagation

Situational reasoning for road driving in an urban environment

Robot navigation in urban environments requires situational reasoning. Given the complexity of the environment and the behavior specified by traffic rules, it is necessary to recognize the current situation to impose the correct traffic rules. In an attempt to manage the complexity of the situational reasoning subsystem, this paper describes a finite state machine model to govern the situational reasoning process. The logic state machine and its interaction with the planning system are discussed. The approach was implemented on Alice, Team Caltech’s entry into the 2007 DARPA Urban Challenge. Results from the qualifying rounds are discussed. The approach is validated and the shortcomings of the implementation are identified

Approximate Reasoning with Fuzzy Booleans

This paper introduces, in analogy to the concept of fuzzy numbers, the concept of fuzzy booleans, and examines approximate reasoning with the compositional rule of inference using fuzzy booleans. It is shown that each set of fuzzy rules is equivalent to a set of fuzzy rules with singleton crisp antecedents; in case of fuzzy booleans this set contains only two rules. It is shown that Zadeh's extension principle is equivalent to the compositional rule of inference using a complete set of fuzzy rules with singleton crisp antecedents. The results are applied to describe the use of approximate reasoning with fuzzy booleans to object-oriented design methods

Reasoning with Forest Logic Programs and f-hybrid Knowledge Bases

Open Answer Set Programming (OASP) is an undecidable framework for integrating ontologies and rules. Although several decidable fragments of OASP have been identified, few reasoning procedures exist. In this article, we provide a sound, complete, and terminating algorithm for satisfiability checking w.r.t. Forest Logic Programs (FoLPs), a fragment of OASP where rules have a tree shape and allow for inequality atoms and constants. The algorithm establishes a decidability result for FoLPs. Although believed to be decidable, so far only the decidability for two small subsets of FoLPs, local FoLPs and acyclic FoLPs, has been shown. We further introduce f-hybrid knowledge bases, a hybrid framework where \SHOQ{} knowledge bases and forest logic programs co-exist, and we show that reasoning with such knowledge bases can be reduced to reasoning with forest logic programs only. We note that f-hybrid knowledge bases do not require the usual (weakly) DL-safety of the rule component, providing thus a genuine alternative approach to current integration approaches of ontologies and rules

A Goal-Directed Implementation of Query Answering for Hybrid MKNF Knowledge Bases

Ontologies and rules are usually loosely coupled in knowledge representation formalisms. In fact, ontologies use open-world reasoning while the leading semantics for rules use non-monotonic, closed-world reasoning. One exception is the tightly-coupled framework of Minimal Knowledge and Negation as Failure (MKNF), which allows statements about individuals to be jointly derived via entailment from an ontology and inferences from rules. Nonetheless, the practical usefulness of MKNF has not always been clear, although recent work has formalized a general resolution-based method for querying MKNF when rules are taken to have the well-founded semantics, and the ontology is modeled by a general oracle. That work leaves open what algorithms should be used to relate the entailments of the ontology and the inferences of rules. In this paper we provide such algorithms, and describe the implementation of a query-driven system, CDF-Rules, for hybrid knowledge bases combining both (non-monotonic) rules under the well-founded semantics and a (monotonic) ontology, represented by a CDF Type-1 (ALQ) theory. To appear in Theory and Practice of Logic Programming (TPLP