On the Containment of SPARQL Queries under Entailment Regimes

Most description logics (DL) query languages allow instance retrieval from an ABox. However, SPARQL is a schema query language allowing access to the TBox (in addition to the ABox). Moreover, its entailment regimes enable to take into account knowledge inferred from knowledge bases in the query answering process. This provides a new perspective for the containment problem. In this paper, we study the containment of SPARQL queries over OWL EL axioms under entailment. OWL EL is the language used by many large scale ontologies and is based on EL++. The main contribution is a novel approach to rewriting queries using SPARQL property paths and the µ-calculus in order to reduce containment test under entailment into validity check in the µ-calculus.

[1]  Pierre Genevès,et al.  Expressive Logical Combinators for Free , 2015, IJCAI.

[2]  Diego Calvanese,et al.  Containment of Conjunctive Regular Path Queries with Inverse , 2000, KR.

[3]  Jérôme Euzenat,et al.  SPARQL Query Containment Under SHI Axioms , 2012, AAAI.

[4]  Sebastian Rudolph,et al.  Schema-Agnostic Query Rewriting in SPARQL 1.1 , 2014, International Semantic Web Conference.

[5]  Yevgeny Kazakov,et al.  From Polynomial Procedures to Efficient Reasoning with EL Ontologies , 2013 .

[6]  Carsten Lutz,et al.  Deciding FO-Rewritability in EL , 2012, Description Logics.

[7]  Reinhard Pichler,et al.  Containment and equivalence of well-designed SPARQL , 2014, PODS.

[8]  Markus Krötzsch,et al.  SPARQL beyond Subgraph Matching , 2010, SEMWEB.

[9]  Riccardo Rosati,et al.  On Conjunctive Query Answering in EL , 2007, Description Logics.

[10]  Melisachew Wudage Chekol.  Static Analysis of Semantic Web Queries. (Analyse Statique de Requête pour le Web Se'mantique) , 2012 .

[11]  Franz Baader,et al.  Pushing the EL Envelope Further , 2008, OWLED.

[12]  Pierre Genevès,et al.  Efficient static analysis of XML paths and types , 2007, PLDI '07.

[13]  Marcelo Arenas,et al.  Semantics and Complexity of SPARQL , 2006, International Semantic Web Conference.

[14]  Carsten Lutz,et al.  Efficient Query Rewriting in the Description Logic EL and Beyond , 2015, IJCAI.

[15]  Franz Baader,et al.  Pushing the EL Envelope , 2005, IJCAI.

[16]  Markus Krötzsch.  Efficient Rule-Based Inferencing for OWL EL , 2011, IJCAI.

[17]  Jérôme Euzenat,et al.  SPARQL Query Containment under RDFS Entailment Regime , 2012, IJCAR.

[18]  Egor V. Kostylev,et al.  SPARQL with Property Paths , 2015, SEMWEB.

[19]  Diego Calvanese,et al.  Reasoning on regular path queries , 2003, SGMD.

[20]  Sebastian Rudolph,et al.  Conjunctive Queries for EL with Composition of Roles , 2007, Description Logics.

[21]  Birte Glimm,et al.  Using SPARQL with RDFS and OWL Entailment , 2011, Reasoning Web.

[22]  Pierre Genev,et al.  A System for the Static Analysis of XPath , 2006 .

[23]  Raghu Ramakrishnan,et al.  Containment of conjunctive queries: beyond relations as sets , 1995, TODS.

[24]  D. Kozen.  Results on the Propositional µ-Calculus , 1982 .

[25]  Pierre Genevès,et al.  A system for the static analysis of XPath , 2006, TOIS.

[26]  Jérôme Euzenat,et al.  Evaluating and Benchmarking SPARQL Query Containment Solvers , 2013, SEMWEB.

[27]  Markus Krötzsch,et al.  The Incredible ELK , 2013, Journal of Automated Reasoning.

[28]  Diego Calvanese,et al.  Conjunctive query containment and answering under description logic constraints , 2008, TOCL.