Semantic Web in Depth Rules Dr Nicholas Gibbins - 2013-2014.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
W3C Rules Interchange Format Basic Logic Dialect
Advertisements

Dr. Leo Obrst MITRE Information Semantics Information Discovery & Understanding Command & Control Center February 6, 2014February 6, 2014February 6, 2014.
Requirements. UC&R: Phase Compliance model –RIF must define a compliance model that will identify required/optional features Default.
SPARQL Dimitar Kazakov, with references to material by Noureddin Sadawi ARIN, 2014.
CH-4 Ontologies, Querying and Data Integration. Introduction to RDF(S) RDF stands for Resource Description Framework. RDF is a standard for describing.
Problems Title cfr.Prolog: database of facts, rules, query and solutions.
An Introduction to Description Logics
RDF Schemata (with apologies to the W3C, the plural is not ‘schemas’) CSCI 7818 – Web Technologies 14 November 2001 Van Lepthien.
An Introduction to RDF(S) and a Quick Tour of OWL
Sujit R Nair November 30,2009. Introduction Need / Requirement. Characteristics of current rule markup Languages. A sample Scenario of Rule Interchange.
ESDSWG2011 – Semantic Web session Semantic Web Sub-group Session ESDSWG 2011 Meeting – Semantic Web sub-group session Wednesday, November 2, 2011 Norfolk,
RDF Tutorial.
 Copyright 2004 Digital Enterprise Research Institute. All rights reserved. SPARQL Query Language for RDF presented by Cristina Feier.
Of 27 lecture 7: owl - introduction. of 27 ece 627, winter ‘132 OWL a glimpse OWL – Web Ontology Language describes classes, properties and relations.
1 Ontology Language Comparisons doug foxvog 16 September 2004.
Some W3C SW technologies to watch… Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Gathering Amsterdam, 16 March, 2009.
Ontologies and the Semantic Web by Ian Horrocks presented by Thomas Packer 1.
A year on the Semantic W3C (or: what is happening these days?) Semantic Web Meetup, Seattle, Ivan Herman, W3C.
Proof System HY-566. Proof layer Next layer of SW is logic and proof layers. – allow the user to state any logical principles, – computer can to infer.
© Copyright 2008 STI INNSBRUCK Rule Interchange Format Semantic Web Lecture Lecture VIII – xx 2009 Dieter Fensel.
From SHIQ and RDF to OWL: The Making of a Web Ontology Language
Dr. Jim Bowring Computer Science Department College of Charleston CSIS 690 (633) May Evening 2009 Semantic Web Principles and Practice Class 3: 18 May.
JOSH FLECK Semantic Web. What is Semantic Web? Movement led by W3C that promotes common formats for data on the web Describes things in a way that computer.
An OWL based schema for personal data protection policies Giles Hogben Joint Research Centre, European Commission.
CSE 428 Semantic Web Topics Introduction Jeff Heflin Lehigh University.
Ontologies: Making Computers Smarter to Deal with Data Kei Cheung, PhD Yale Center for Medical Informatics CBB752, February 9, 2015, Yale University.
RDF: Concepts and Abstract Syntax W3C Recommendation 10 February Michael Felderer Digital Enterprise.
1. Motivation Knowledge in the Semantic Web must be shared and modularly organised. The semantics of the modular ERDF framework has been defined model.
Practical RDF Chapter 1. RDF: An Introduction
Notes for Chapter 12 Logic Programming The AI War Basic Concepts of Logic Programming Prolog Review questions.
Knowledge Interchange Format Michael Gruninger National Institute of Standards and Technology
An Introduction to Description Logics. What Are Description Logics? A family of logic based Knowledge Representation formalisms –Descendants of semantic.
1 CENTRIA, Dept. Informática da Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Caparica, Portugal. 2 Institute of Computer Science,
SAWA: An Assistant for Higher-Level Fusion and Situation Awareness Christopher J. Matheus, Mieczyslaw M. Kokar, Kenneth Baclawski, Jerzy A. Letkowski,
The Semantic Web Web Science Systems Development Spring 2015.
Chapter 3 Querying RDF stores with SPARQL. Why an RDF Query Language? Why not use an XML query language? XML at a lower level of abstraction than RDF.
Ontology Query. What is an Ontology Ontologies resemble faceted taxonomies but use richer semantic relationships among terms and attributes, as well as.
Pavan Reddiavri (Ebiquity Labs) “R ♫ P” RDF Access control Policies.
Logical Agents Logic Propositional Logic Summary
Coastal Atlas Interoperability - Ontologies (Advanced topics that we did not get to in detail) Luis Bermudez Stephanie Watson Marine Metadata Interoperability.
Semantic Web - an introduction By Daniel Wu (danielwujr)
Rules, RIF and RuleML.
Semantically Processing The Semantic Web Presented by: Kunal Patel Dr. Gopal Gupta UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT DALLAS.
Introduction to the Semantic Web and Linked Data Module 1 - Unit 2 The Semantic Web and Linked Data Concepts 1-1 Library of Congress BIBFRAME Pilot Training.
User Profiling using Semantic Web Group members: Ashwin Somaiah Asha Stephen Charlie Sudharshan Reddy.
Of 33 lecture 1: introduction. of 33 the semantic web vision today’s web (1) web content – for human consumption (no structural information) people search.
6 Dec Rev. 14 Dec CmpE 583 Fall 2008OWL Intro 1 OWL Intro Notes off Lacy Ch. 4 Atilla Elçi.
RuleML Rules Lite Harold Boley, NRC IIT e-Business Said Tabet, Macgregor Corp With Key Contributions from the Joint Committee DAML PI Meeting, Captiva.
The Semantic Web Riccardo Rosati Dottorato in Ingegneria Informatica Sapienza Università di Roma a.a. 2006/07.
Of 38 lecture 6: rdf – axiomatic semantics and query.
1 Open Ontology Repository initiative - Planning Meeting - Thu Co-conveners: PeterYim, LeoObrst & MikeDean ref.:
Dr. Bhavani Thuraisingham September 18, 2006 Building Trustworthy Semantic Webs Lecture #9: Logic and Inference Rules.
1 RIF Design Roadmap Draft PM Harold Boley (NRC), Michael Kifer (Stony Brook U), Axel Polleres (DERI), Jos de Bruijn (DERI), Michael Sintek.
© The ATHENA Consortium. Susan Thomas SAP AG, Research Department How do you do semantics? Semantic Web Drawings by Sebastian Cremers Unit 3:
Of 35 lecture 17: semantic web rules. of 35 ece 627, winter ‘132 logic importance - high-level language for expressing knowledge - high expressive power.
Rinke Hoekstra Use of OWL in the Legal Domain Statement of Interest OWLED 2008 DC, Gaithersburg.
Ontology Technology applied to Catalogues Paul Kopp.
Semantic Web in Depth RDFa, GRDDL and POWDER Dr Nicholas Gibbins
Semantic Web in Depth SPARQL Protocol and RDF Query Language Dr Nicholas Gibbins –
Semantic Web In Depth Resource Description Framework Dr Nicholas Gibbins –
NEDA ALIPANAH, MARIA ADELA GRANDO DBMI 11/19/2012.
OWL (Ontology Web Language and Applications) Maw-Sheng Horng Department of Mathematics and Information Education National Taipei University of Education.
OWL, DL and rules Based on slides from Grigoris Antoniou, Frank van Harmele and Vassilis Papataxiarhis.
Resource Description Framework
Using Rules with Ontologies in the Semantic Web
ece 720 intelligent web: ontology and beyond
Semantic Web in Depth Rules
Rules, RIF and RuleML.
Grid Computing 7700 Fall 2005 Lecture 18: Semantic Grid
Grid Computing 7700 Fall 2005 Lecture 18: Semantic Grid
Presentation transcript:

Semantic Web in Depth Rules Dr Nicholas Gibbins

The Role of Rules The Semantic Web concentrates on declarative forms of knowledge representation –OWL, RDF Schema Rules are a common form of procedural knowledge representation elsewhere in Knowledge Engineering –Expert Systems –CLIPS, JESS, OPS, Prolog…

The Role of Rules The KR formalisms of the Semantic Web have expressive limitations which can be overcome by rule-based knowledge For example, we cannot express the fact that a person’s parent’s brother is the person’s uncle in either RDFS or OWL (including OWL Full) –No role composition in OWL 1.0

The Role of Rules Trivial to express in a language like Prolog: hasUncle(X,Y):- hasParent(X,Z), hasBrother(Z,Y). hasBrother(X,Y):- isMale(Y), hasParent(X,Z), hasParent(Y,Z).

Rules XML + Namespaces URIUnicode SignatureEncryption RDF RDF Schema OWL Identity Standard syntax Metadata Ontologies + Inference Explanation Attribution SPARQL (queries) Proof Trust User Interface and Applications The Semantic Web layer cake

SPARQL CONSTRUCT PREFIX foaf: PREFIX vcard: CONSTRUCT { ?x vcard:FN ?name. ?x vcard: ?mail. } WHERE { ?x foaf:name ?name. ?x foaf:mbox ?mail. }

SPARQL CONSTRUCT is not a rule language From the Data Access Working Group Charter: “While it is hoped that the product of the RDF Data Access Working Group will be useful in later development of a rules language, development of such a rules language is out of scope for this working group. However, any serializations of a query language must not preclude extension to, or inclusion in, a rules language. The group should expend minimal effort assuring that such an extension be intuitive and and consistent with any query language produced by the group.”

Rules and the Semantic Web Several proposed rule languages for use with the SW: –RuleML –N3 Rules –Jena Rules –Semantic Web Rule Language (SWRL) –Rule Interchange Format (RIF)

Rule Format The majority of rules in rule-based systems are of the form: A ⇐ B1 ∧ B2 ∧ … ∧ Bn A is known as the consequent or head of the rule B1…Bn are known as the antecedents or body of the rule Also known as Horn Clauses (disjunction with at most one positive literal)

Description Logics and Rules Some work on designing DLs which include trigger rules of the form: C ⇒ D (if an individual is a member of C, then it must be a member of D

Description Logics and Rules C ⇒ D is not the same as saying C ⊑ D (every instance of C is an instance of D) –C ⊑ D is equivalent to saying ¬D ⊑ ¬C (contrapositive) –The trigger rule C ⇒ D is not equivalent to ¬D ⇒ ¬C DLs with rules include an epistemic (modal) operator K: –KC can be read as “the class of things which are known to be of class C” –C ⇒ D is equivalent to KC ⊑ D –Used as a foundation for SWRL, etc

N3 Rules

Defines log: namespace for logical operators –Some triples are “special” – interpreted as components of rules –log: namespace puts ontology into OWL Full Relies on N3 syntax for graphs: {} (not in Turtle, etc) Not widely implemented –cwm (TimBL’s pet reasoner) –+?

N3 Rules General form: { antecedent graph } log:implies { consequent graph }. Example: {?x ont:parent ?y. ?y ont:brother ?z. } log:implies {?x ont:uncle ?z. }.

Jena Rules

Jena RDF/OWL library contains support for forward- and backward-chaining rules –Only implemented in Jena Syntax: [rule name: antecedents -> consequent ] Antecedents expressed as triple patterns (unfortunately not in a SPARQL-like syntax)

Jena Rule Example # Example rule [rule1: (?x ont:parent ?t) (?t ont:brother ?z) -> (?x ont:uncle ?z)] can include other rulebases – these are the entailment rules for RDFS

Semantic Web Rule Language

SWRL Submitted to W3C in 2004 –Based on RuleML subset and OWL –XML and RDF-based serialisations (also, human-readable abstract syntax) –Obeys constraints put on OWL re: disjointness of instances and datatype values Two types of variable in expressions –I-variable – matches class instances –D-variable – matches datatype values

SWRL Rule Example hasParent(?x1,?x2) ∧ hasBrother(?x2,?x3) ⇒ hasUncle(?x1,?x3) In abstract syntax: Implies(Antecedent(hasParent(I-variable(x1) I-variable(x2)) hasBrother(I-variable(x2) I-variable(x3))) Consequent(hasUncle(I-variable(x1) I-variable(x3))))

SWRL Rule Example Artist(?x) ∧ artistStyle(?x,?y) ∧ Style(?y) ∧ creator(?z,?x) ⇒ style/period(?z,?y) Implies(Antecedent(Artist(I-variable(x)) artistStyle(I-variable(x) I-variable(y)) Style(I-variable(y)) creator(I-variable(z) I-variable(x))) Consequent(style/period(I-variable(z) I-variable(y))))

SWRL Rule Example Artist(?x) ∧ (≤1 artistStyle)(?x) ∧ creator(?z,?x) ⇒ (≤1 style/period)(?z) Implies(Antecedent(Artist(I-variable(x)) (restriction(artistStyle maxCardinality(1))) (I-variable(x)) Style(I-variable(y)) creator(I-variable(z) I-variable(x))) Consequent((restriction(style/period maxCardinality(1)) (I-variable(z))))

SWRL XML Syntax x1 x2 x2 x3 x1 x3

SWRL RDF Syntax …

Rule Interchange Format

W3C Working Group chartered in late 2005 More expressive language than SWRL –Common core with extensions Reached Recommendation in June 2010

Rule Interchange Format Defines XML syntax and non-XML presentation syntax (c.f. OWL) Latest version from:

RIF Dialects Two dialects (building on a common core): RIF Basic Logic Dialect –Monotonic condition and conclusion –Statements are either true or false –The values of predicates cannot be changed, you can only add new staements RIF Production Rule Dialect –Non-monotonic condition and conclusion –Values of predicates can be changed

RIF Basic Logic Dialect Definite Horn rules –Disjunction with exactly one positive literal A :- B and C and D N-ary predicates (sugared syntax)

RIF Structure Rules occur in Groups: Group( (Forall ?x Q(?x) :- P(?x)) (Forall ?x Q(?x) :- R(?x)) ) Groups occur in Documents: Document( Group( (Forall ?x Q(?x) :- P(?x)) (Forall ?x Q(?x) :- R(?x)) ) Group( (Forall ?y R(?y) :- S(?y)) ) )

RIF Example Document( Prefix(cpt Prefix(ppl Prefix(bks Group ( Forall ?Buyer ?Item ?Seller ( cpt:buy(?Buyer ?Item ?Seller) :- cpt:sell(?Seller ?Item ?Buyer) ) cpt:sell(ppl:John bks:LeRif ppl:Mary) ) )

RIF Example Document( Prefix(dbp Prefix(my Prefix(rdfs Group ( Forall ?mname ?aname ?movie ?actor my:actorIn(?aname ?mname) :- And( dbp:starring(?movie ?actor) rdfs:label(?movie ?mname) rdfs:label(?actor ?aname) ) ) )

RIF Example Document( Prefix(dbp Prefix(my Prefix(rdfs Group ( Forall ?mname ?aname ?movie ?actor my:actorIn(?aname ?mname) :- And( ?movie[dbp:starring -> ?actor rdfs:label -> ?mname] ?actor[rdfs:label ?aname] ) ) )