Annotated RDF Octavian Udrea Diego Reforgiato Recupero V.S. Subrahmanian University of Maryland.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Combining Abstract Interpreters Sumit Gulwani Microsoft Research Redmond, Group Ashish Tiwari SRI RADRAD.
Advertisements

Computer Science CPSC 322 Lecture 25 Top Down Proof Procedure (Ch 5.2.2)
CSCI 115 Chapter 6 Order Relations and Structures.
Lecture 11: Datalog Tuesday, February 6, Outline Datalog syntax Examples Semantics: –Minimal model –Least fixpoint –They are equivalent Naive evaluation.
Variational Methods for Graphical Models Micheal I. Jordan Zoubin Ghahramani Tommi S. Jaakkola Lawrence K. Saul Presented by: Afsaneh Shirazi.
Size-estimation framework with applications to transitive closure and reachability Presented by Maxim Kalaev Edith Cohen AT&T Bell Labs 1996.
Answer Set Programming Overview Dr. Rogelio Dávila Pérez Profesor-Investigador División de Posgrado Universidad Autónoma de Guadalajara
Preference Elicitation Partial-revelation VCG mechanism for Combinatorial Auctions and Eliciting Non-price Preferences in Combinatorial Auctions.
STUN: SPATIO-TEMPORAL UNCERTAIN (SOCIAL) NETWORKS Chanhyun Kang Computer Science Dept. University of Maryland, USA Andrea Pugliese.
Leveraging Data and Structure in Ontology Integration Octavian Udrea 1 Lise Getoor 1 Renée J. Miller 2 1 University of Maryland College Park 2 University.
20081COMMA08 – Toulouse, May 2008 The Computational Complexity of Ideal Semantics I Abstract Argumentation Frameworks Paul E. Dunne Dept. Of Computer Science.
Probabilistic RDF Octavian Udrea 1 V.S. Subrahmanian 1 Zoran Majkić 2 1 University of Maryland College Park 2 University “La Sapienza”, Rome, Italy.
CPSC 322, Lecture 23Slide 1 Logic: TD as search, Datalog (variables) Computer Science cpsc322, Lecture 23 (Textbook Chpt 5.2 & some basic concepts from.
CPSC 322, Lecture 19Slide 1 Propositional Logic Intro, Syntax Computer Science cpsc322, Lecture 19 (Textbook Chpt ) February, 23, 2009.
Weizmann Institute Deciding equality formulas by small domain instantiations O. Shtrichman The Weizmann Institute Joint work with A.Pnueli, Y.Rodeh, M.Siegel.
1 Basic abstract interpretation theory. 2 The general idea §a semantics l any definition style, from a denotational definition to a detailed interpreter.
Branch and Bound Similar to backtracking in generating a search tree and looking for one or more solutions Different in that the “objective” is constrained.
Probabilistic Reasoning Copyright, 1996 © Dale Carnegie & Associates, Inc. Chapter 14 (14.1, 14.2, 14.3, 14.4) Capturing uncertain knowledge Probabilistic.
1 Draft of a Matchmaking Service Chuang liu. 2 Matchmaking Service Matchmaking Service is a service to help service providers to advertising their service.
Data Flow Analysis Compiler Design Nov. 3, 2005.
TOSS: An Extension of TAX with Ontologies and Similarity Queries Edward Hung, Yu Deng, V.S. Subrahmanian Department of Computer Science University of Maryland,
1 Chapter 1: Constraints What are they, what do they do and what can I use them for.
Data Flow Analysis Compiler Design October 5, 2004 These slides live on the Web. I obtained them from Jeff Foster and he said that he obtained.
Semantics For the Semantic Web: The Implicit, the Formal and The Powerful Amit Sheth, Cartic Ramakrishnan, Christopher Thomas CS751 Spring 2005 Presenter:
¹ -Calculus Based on: “Model Checking”, E. Clarke and O. Grumberg (ch. 6, 7) “Symbolic Model Checking: 10^20 States and Beyond”, Burch, Clark, et al “Introduction.
Data Flow Analysis Compiler Design Nov. 8, 2005.
Theory and Applications
1 Characterizing Selfishly Constructed Overlay Routing Networks March 11, 2004 Byung-Gon Chun, Rodrigo Fonseca, Ion Stoica, and John Kubiatowicz University.
ASP vs. Prolog like programming ASP is adequate for: –NP-complete problems –situation where the whole program is relevant for the problem at hands èIf.
Multi-Layered Navigation Meshes Wouter G. van Toll, Atlas F. Cook IV, Roland Geraerts ICT.OPEN 2011.
Managing Large RDF Graphs (Infinite Graph) Vaibhav Khadilkar Department of Computer Science, The University of Texas at Dallas FEARLESS engineering.
GRIN – A Graph Based RDF Index Octavian Udrea Andrea Pugliese V. S. Subrahmanian Presented by Tulika Thakur.
Ontology Alignment/Matching Prafulla Palwe. Agenda ► Introduction  Being serious about the semantic web  Living with heterogeneity  Heterogeneity problem.
A Model and Algorithms for Pricing Queries Tang Ruiming, Wu Huayu, Bao Zhifeng, Stephane Bressan, Patrick Valduriez.
1 Automatic Refinement and Vacuity Detection for Symbolic Trajectory Evaluation Orna Grumberg Technion Haifa, Israel Joint work with Rachel Tzoref.
Author: Graham Hughes, Tevfik Bultan Computer Science Department, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, USA Source: International Journal.
Pattern-directed inference systems
Slide 1 Propositional Definite Clause Logic: Syntax, Semantics and Bottom-up Proofs Jim Little UBC CS 322 – CSP October 20, 2014.
Slide 1 A Class of Prolog Programs with Non-linear Outputs Inferable from Positive Data M.R.K. Krishna Rao King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals.
1 Grammar Extraction and Refinement from an HPSG Corpus Kiril Simov BulTreeBank Project ( Linguistic Modeling Laboratory, Bulgarian.
The Colorful Traveling Salesman Problem Yupei Xiong, Goldman, Sachs & Co. Bruce Golden, University of Maryland Edward Wasil, American University Presented.
Efficient Processing of Top-k Spatial Preference Queries
Spatio-temporal Pattern Queries M. Hadjieleftheriou G. Kollios P. Bakalov V. J. Tsotras.
CS 267: Automated Verification Lecture 3: Fixpoints and Temporal Properties Instructor: Tevfik Bultan.
A Logic of Partially Satisfied Constraints Nic Wilson Cork Constraint Computation Centre Computer Science, UCC.
CS6133 Software Specification and Verification
1 First order theories (Chapter 1, Sections 1.4 – 1.5) From the slides for the book “Decision procedures” by D.Kroening and O.Strichman.
Reasoning about the Behavior of Semantic Web Services with Concurrent Transaction Logic Presented By Dumitru Roman, Michael Kifer University of Innsbruk,
A Portrait of the Semantic Web in Action Jeff Heflin and James Hendler IEEE Intelligent Systems December 6, 2010 Hyewon Lim.
Web Science & Technologies University of Koblenz ▪ Landau, Germany Models of Definite Programs.
Set-theoretical models of untyped -calculus Motivation for models: Better intuition about the formal theory. Consistency results follow by soundness. Completeness.
GRIN: A Graph Based RDF Index Octavian Udrea 1 Andrea Pugliese 2 V. S. Subrahmanian 1 1 University of Maryland College Park 2 Università di Calabria.
Program Analysis Mooly Sagiv Tel Aviv University Sunday Scrieber 8 Monday Schrieber.
Page 1 Renzo Angles and Claudio Gutierrez University of Chile ACM Computing Surveys, 2008 Survey of Graph Database Models.
Massive Support Vector Regression (via Row and Column Chunking) David R. Musicant and O.L. Mangasarian NIPS 99 Workshop on Learning With Support Vectors.
Abstraction and Abstract Interpretation. Abstraction (a simplified view) Abstraction is an effective tool in verification Given a transition system, we.
Review: Discrete Mathematics and Its Applications
Models of Definite Programs
RE-Tree: An Efficient Index Structure for Regular Expressions
NP-Completeness Yin Tat Lee
How Hard Can It Be?.
Review: Discrete Mathematics and Its Applications
Chapter 11 Limitations of Algorithm Power
Models of Definite Programs
Ontology.
Data Flow Analysis Compiler Design
NP-Completeness Yin Tat Lee
Efficient Processing of Top-k Spatial Preference Queries
Probabilistic Databases with MarkoViews
Representations & Reasoning Systems (RRS) (2.2)
Presentation transcript:

Annotated RDF Octavian Udrea Diego Reforgiato Recupero V.S. Subrahmanian University of Maryland

Motivation  Many RDF extensions for specific scenarios: Temporal (Gutierrez et. al 2005) Uncertainty (Dubois et. al 2005, Straccia et al. 2005) Provenance (Carroll et. al 2005)  Can we construct a common syntax and semantics for RDF extensions? Together with efficient query mechanism

Foundations of aRDF  Annotations are partial orders (A,≤) A fuzzy, A time, A time-intervals, A pedigree  Cartesian products can generate others Such as A fuzz-time = A fuzzy X A time  Builds on annotated logic (Kifer et al. 1992)

aRDF syntax Set of annotated triples (r,p:a,v)

aRDF syntax We’re.9 sure that Max had Adam as an advisor until 2004

aRDF satisfying interpretation  We consider transitive properties as a simple inference capability  A mapping I from the universe of possible triples (r,p,v) to A  A satisfying interpretation I for O has: For all (r,p:a,v) in O, a ≤ I(r,p,v) For all paths on transitive properties, the lower bounds of the set of annotations is less than I(r,p,v)  Entailment defined in the usual way

Satisfying interpretation example

(0.9,2003) ≤ I(Max,hasSupervisor,William)

Satisfying interpretation example

No matter what we assign to I(Mary,hasSupervisor,William), I will not satisfy O

aRDF consistency  The existence of a satisfying I: For (r,p:a i,v), the set {a i } has an upper bound Let A k (r,p,v) be the set of annotations on the k th p-path from r to v (for transitive p) The set B = {LB(A k )} has an upper bound

aRDF consistency results  All RDF instances annotated with partial orders with top elements are consistent  For general partial orders, consistency verification runs in O(p *(n 3 * e + n*a 2 ))

aRDF atomic queries  (R,P:A,V) where at most one is variable  Examples: (Max, ?p:(0.8,2002), William) (Mary, hasSupervisor:(0.7,2002),?v)  (r,p:a,v) and (r’,p’:a’,v’) are semi- unifiable if there is a substitution θ: r θ = r’ θ, p θ = p’ θ, v θ = v’ θ

aRDF atomic query answers  The answer to (R,P:A,V) is the set of (r,p:a,v) such that: (r,p:a,v) is semi-unifiable with (R,P:A,V) and A ≤ a (where applicable) (r,p:a,v) is entailed by the aRDF ontology (r,p:a,v) is not entailed by a subset of the answer  The minimal (w.r.t. entailment) set of triples entailed by the theory that semi- unifies with the query

aRDF atomic query examples Query: (Max,?p:(0.8,2002), William) Answer: {(Max, hasSupervisor:(0.9,2003), William)}

aRDF atomic query examples Query: (Mary,hasSupervisor:(0.7,2002), ?v) Answer: {(Mary, hasAdvisor:(0.7,2003), William)}

aRDF theory closure  At each step, add to O one of: For (r,p:a 1,v), (r,p’:a 2,v), p’ is a subProperty of p (or p = p’), add (r,p:a,v), where a is a minimal upper bound for a 1,a 2 Add (r,p:a,v) for (r,p’:a1,r’), (r’,p’’:a2,v), where  p’,p’’ are subProperty* of p  For all a’, (a’ ≤ a1) and (a’ ≤ a2) => (a’ ≤ a)  Monotonic operator => there exists a fixpoint lfp(O)

Naïve query answer algorithm 1. Compute closure lfp(O) 2. Choose semi-unifiable triples with annotations “above” the query’s 3. Eliminate any triples entailed by subsets

atomicAnswerX algorithms  lfp(O) can be exponential But the minimal set we look for in the answer is not  atomicAnswerV computes the answer to (R,P:A,V?) queries  atomicAnswerP computes the answer to (R,P?:A,V) queries  conjunctAnswer answers conjunctions of atomic queries

atomicAnswerX algorithms  atomicAnswerV: For the maximal transitive p-paths starting at r, compute: The lower bound(s) on the sets of annotations The least upper bound(s) of the previous set  atomicAnswerP: Similar approach for the maximal paths between r and v

atomicAnswerX complexity  atomicAnswerV (and R) are running in time O(n 2 * e + n * e * a 2 ) O(n 2 * e + n * e * a 2 ) when annotation is a complete lattice  atomicAnswerP is has the same worst- case complexity  atomicAnswerA is O(n * e * a 2 )  Complexity results given for finite partial orders For lattices, the “a” factors dissapear

Experimental results  Existing RDF ontologies with randomly generated annotations  Synthetically generated data up to 100,000 nodes Also varied number of properties, node degree, number of transitive properties, etc.

Consistency running time

atomicAnswer running time

Applications  We have started using aRDF on the STORY project  An online aRDF system will be released in August 2006 Features such as graphical editing and annotation, custom annotations, view maintenance

Conclusions  We have presented a general framework for extending RDF Based on annotated logic  Simple syntax and semantics  Query algorithms are very efficient in practice

Questions and comments