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)
© Copyright 2024 Paperzz