Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of

Effective computation of maximal sound
approximations of Description Logic ontologies
Marco Console and Jose Mora and Riccardo Rosati and
Valerio Santarelli and Domenico Fabio Savo
Dipartimento di Ingegneria Informatica Automatica e Gestionale Antonio Ruberti
Sapienza Università di Roma, Italia
13th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC-2014)
Riva del Garda, Italy, October 19-23 2014
Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of Description Logic ontologies
21/10/2014
(1/25)
Ontology approximation
The problem
When using ontologies as a formal description of the domain of
interest, the use of expressive languages (OWL 2) is useful.
When using ontologies for reasoning, high expressivity may be a
problem. In particular, when accessing large quantities of data
(OBDA), computational cost of languages such as OWL 2 is
prohibitive.
Ontology Approximation: Given a ontology O in a language L,
compute an ontology O0 in a target language L0 , in which “as much as
possible” of the semantics of O is preserved.
I can represent a solution for performing costly reasoning services
over ontologies in expressive languages.
Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of Description Logic ontologies
21/10/2014
(2/25)
Outline
We investigate the problem of approximating ontologies for OBDA
purposes.
1
A new definition of approximation of DL ontologies
2
Approximating OWL 2 ontologies in OWL 2 QL
3
Experimental evaluation
4
Conclusions and future works
Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of Description Logic ontologies
21/10/2014
(3/25)
Outline
1
Preliminaries
2
A new definition of approximation
3
Approximation in OWL 2 QL
4
Experimental evaluation
5
Conclusions and Future Work
Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of Description Logic ontologies
21/10/2014
(4/25)
Preliminaries
OWL 2 QL is the “data oriented” profile of OWL 2.
Expressions in OWL 2 QL
B
C
Q
R
−→
−→
−→
−→
A
B
P
Q
|
|
|
|
∃Q | δF (U ) | >C | ⊥C
¬B | ∃Q.A
P − | >P | ⊥P
¬Q
E
F
V
W
−→
−→
−→
−→
ρ(U )
>D | T1 | · · · | Tn
U | >A | ⊥ A
V | ¬V
Assertions in OWL 2 QL
BvC
QvR
U vV
EvF
ref (P )
A(a)
P (a, b)
U (a, v)
irref (P )
We say that OWL 2 QL is a closed language: each set of OWL 2 QL
axioms is an OWL 2 QL ontology.
Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of Description Logic ontologies
21/10/2014
(5/25)
Outline
1
Preliminaries
2
A new definition of approximation
3
Approximation in OWL 2 QL
4
Experimental evaluation
5
Conclusions and Future Work
Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of Description Logic ontologies
21/10/2014
(6/25)
What we want when we approximate
We deal with semantic approximation:
soundness: only produce correct entailments;
preserve as much as possible of these entailments by means of an
ontology in the target language.
In terms of models of the ontologies:
I Soundness: set of models of the approximation must be a superset
of those of the original ontology
I Minimal change: keep minimal distance between the original
ontology and its approximation
Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of Description Logic ontologies
21/10/2014
(7/25)
Ontology approximation
We give our notion of approximation in a language LT of an ontology O.
Definition
Let OS be a satisfiable LS -ontology, and let ΣOS be the set of predicate and
constant symbols occurring in OS . An LT -ontology OT over ΣOS is a global
semantic approximation (GSA) in LT of OS if both the following statements
hold:
(i) M od(OS ) ⊆ M od(OT );
(soundness)
(ii) there is no LT -ontology O0 over ΣOS such that
M od(OS ) ⊆ M od(O0 ) ⊂ M od(OT ). (minimal change)
We denote with globalApx (OS , LT ) the set of all the GSAs in LT of OS .
Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of Description Logic ontologies
21/10/2014
(8/25)
Existence and Uniqueness
Lemma (Existence)
Given a language LT and a finite signature Σ, if the set of
non-equivalent axioms in an LT -ontology that one can generate over Σ
is finite, then for any LS -ontology OS globalApx (OS , LT ) 6= ∅.
Lemma (Uniqueness)
Let LT be a closed language, and let OS be an ontology. For each O0
and O00 belonging to globalApx (OS , LT ), we have that O0 and O00 are
logically equivalent.
Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of Description Logic ontologies
21/10/2014
(9/25)
A constructive notion of approximation
A more constructive definition, based on the notion of Entailment Set
[Pan&Thomas 2007].
Definition
Let O be a satisfiable ontology expressed in a language L over a signature Σ,
and let L’ be a language, not necessarily different from L. The entailment set
of O with respect to L0 , denoted as ES(O, L0 ), is the set which contains all L0
axioms over Σ that are entailed by O.
Theorem
Let OS be a satisfiable LS -ontology and let OT be a satisfiable LT -ontology.
We have that:
(a) M od(OS ) ⊆ M od(OT ) if and only if ES(OT , LT ) ⊆ ES(OS , LT );
(b) there is no LT -ontology O0 such that M od(OS ) ⊆ M od(O0 ) ⊂ M od(OT )
if and only if there is no LT -ontology O00 such that
ES(OT , LT ) ⊂ ES(O00 , LT ) ⊆ ES(OS , LT ).
[Pan&Thomas 2007]: Jeff Z. Pan and Edward Thomas. Approximating OWL-DL ontologies. In Proc. of AAAI, 2007.
Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of Description Logic ontologies
21/10/2014
(10/25)
A new notion of approximation
Computing the entailment set of an ontology is hard: need to
reason over the ontology as a whole!
Idea: instead of reasoning over the whole ontology, we only reason over
portions of it.
k-approximation
I Parametric approximation: only reason over k axioms at a time.
I approximate by computing GSA of each set of k axioms of the
original ontology in isolation.
Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of Description Logic ontologies
21/10/2014
(11/25)
k-approximation
Definition
Let OS be a satisfiable LS -ontology and let ΣOS be the set of predicate and
constant symbols occurring in OS . Let Uk = {Oij | Oij ∈ globalApx (Oi , LT ),
such that Oi ∈ subsetk (OS )}. An LT -ontology OT over ΣOS is a
k-approximation in LT of OS if both the following statements hold:
T
j
(soundness)
O j ∈Uk M od(Oi ) ⊆ M od(OT );
i
there is no LT -ontology O0 over ΣOS such that
T
j
0
(minimal change)
O j ∈Uk M od(Oi ) ⊆ M od(O ) ⊂ M od(OT ).
i
subsetk (O): set of all sets of cardinality k of axioms of O
Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of Description Logic ontologies
21/10/2014
(12/25)
Two notable cases for k-approximation
1
k
| Os|
I for k = |OS |, k-approximation = GSA
I for k = 1, each axiom is treated in isolation, so we consider
ontologies formed by a single axiom
Local Semantic Approximation (LSA)
Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of Description Logic ontologies
21/10/2014
(13/25)
An example of GSA and LSA
Example
Approximation of O in OWL 2
O
=
OGSA = {
{
AvBtC
BuC vF
AvD
AvE
OLSA = {
BvD
CvD
BvD
CvD
BvD
CvD
A v ∃R.D
∃R.D v E
A v ∃R
DvF
}.
A v ∃R.D
}.
A v ∃R
A v ∃R.D
}.
Observation: M od(O) ⊂ M od(OGSA ) ⊂ M od(OLSA )
I OGSA approximates O better than OLSA
Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of Description Logic ontologies
21/10/2014
(14/25)
Outline
1
Preliminaries
2
A new definition of approximation
3
Approximation in OWL 2 QL
4
Experimental evaluation
5
Conclusions and Future Work
Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of Description Logic ontologies
21/10/2014
(15/25)
k-approximation in OWL 2 QL
Theorem
Let OS be a satisfiable OWL 2 ontology. Then the OWL 2 QL ontology
S
Oi ∈subsetk (OS ) ES(Oi , OW L 2 QL) is the k-approximation in OWL 2
QL of OS .
for OWL 2 QL, the set of non-equivalent axioms that can be generated
over a signature is finite → GSA in OWL 2 QL always exists (Existence
Lemma);
OWL 2 QL is closed:
all ontologies in ES(OS , OW L 2 QL) are pairwise logically
equivalent (Uniqueness Lemma)
ES(OS , OW L 2 QL) is an OWL 2 QL ontology for any language of
OS
the union of a set of OWL 2 QL ontologies is still an OWL 2 QL
ontology
Observation: for k = |OS | the k-approximation OT in OWL 2 QL of
OS is unique and coincides with its entailment set in OWL 2 QL.
Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of Description Logic ontologies
21/10/2014
(16/25)
Computing k-approximation in OWL 2 QL
Algorithm: computeKApx(O, k)
Input: a satisfiable OWL 2 ontology O, a positive integer k such that k ≤ |O|
Output: an OWL 2 QL ontology OApx
begin
OApx ← ∅;
foreach ontology Oi ∈ subsetk (OS )
OApx ← OApx ∪ ES(Oi , OW L 2 QL);
return OApx ;
end
Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of Description Logic ontologies
21/10/2014
(17/25)
Outline
1
Preliminaries
2
A new definition of approximation
3
Approximation in OWL 2 QL
4
Experimental evaluation
5
Conclusions and Future Work
Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of Description Logic ontologies
21/10/2014
(18/25)
Experimental evaluation
1
2
GSA (k = |OS |) vs. LSA (k = 1)
GSA and LSA vs. syntactic sound approximation (baseline)
I Timeout set at 8 hours
I 41 Bioportal ontologies tested
I GSA computable for 26/41 ontologies
I LSA always computable
Ontology
Vertebrate anatomy
Spatial
Translational medicine
Skeletal anatomy
Pato
Lipid
Plant
Mosquito anatomy
Idomal namespace
Cognitive atlas
Fly anatomy
OVERALL AVERAGE
GSA/original
93%
63%
86%
95%
89%
87%
96%
99%
99%
97%
99%
80%
LSA/GSA
97%
86%
99%
92%
100%
97%
81%
44%
98%
100%
67%
87%
Ontology
Protein
Dolce
Galen-A
Fyp
Gene
FMA OBO
OVERALL AVERAGE
SYNT/GSA
56%
42%
30%
57%
78%
89%
81%
44%
59%
26%
67%
72%
SYNT/LSA
67%
52%
64%
99%
99%
97%
100%
100%
100%
30%
100%
90%
LSA/original
47%
78%
70%
85%
99%
99%
72%
LSA time (s)
20
8
26
43
178
113
51
Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of Description Logic ontologies
GSA time (s)
3
9
19
27
99
47
929
214
496
162
25499
1110
LSA time (s)
3
4
7
5
18
10
15
16
16
17
45
41
21/10/2014
(19/25)
Experimental evaluation
Final considerations:
I GSA provides maximal sound approximation in reasonable time for
majority of tested ontologies (80% average for 26/41);
I LSA provides very fast solution in all cases, and captures on average
significant portion of GSA (87% average);
I LSA provides good approximation even for ontologies for which GSA is
not computable (72% average);
I LSA and GSA both compare favorably against syntactix sound
approximation (respectively 90% and 72% average).
for very large ontologies, 10% difference for LSA/SYNT means
preserving thousands of axioms in very little time
GSA and LSA both useful approaches!
Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of Description Logic ontologies
21/10/2014
(20/25)
Outline
1
Preliminaries
2
A new definition of approximation
3
Approximation in OWL 2 QL
4
Experimental evaluation
5
Conclusions and Future Work
Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of Description Logic ontologies
21/10/2014
(21/25)
Conclusions and Future Work
Conclusions
We have proposed a parameterized semantics for computing sound
approximations of ontologies;
We have provided algorithms for approximations (GSA and LSA) of
OWL 2 ontologies in OWL 2 QL;
Extensive experimental evaluation which demonstrate the validity
of both GSA and LSA.
Future Works
Develop techniques for k-approximations with 1 < k < |OS |;
Integrate ontology module extraction techniques;
When is LSA enough?
Generalizing our approach to OBDA scenario: approximating a
source ontology with both ontology and mappings in the target
OBDA specification.
Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of Description Logic ontologies
21/10/2014
(22/25)
Thank you
Thank you!
Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of Description Logic ontologies
21/10/2014
(23/25)
Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of Description Logic ontologies
21/10/2014
(24/25)
Optimizing the computation of an Entailment Set
Entailment Set: huge number of OWL 2 reasoner invocations for axiom
implications.
Strategy: exploiting acquired knowledge in order to limit the number of
invocation the OWL 2 reasoner (each invocation is 2NExpTime!).
So...
if ∃R has no subsumees, then ∃R.A, ∃R.∃P.A, ∃R.∃P.∃P − , . . .
also have no subsumees.
I save invocations of the OWL 2 reasoner for subsumees of ∃R.A,
∃R.∃P.A, ∃R.∃P.∃P − , . . .
if B1 v B2 and B1 has no disjoint concepts, then also B2 has no
disjoint concepts.
I save invocations of the OWL 2 reasoner for disjoint concepts of
every subsumer of B1 .
Effective computation of maximal sound approximations of Description Logic ontologies
21/10/2014
(25/25)