1. Semi-Automatic Quality Assessment of Linked Data without Requiring Ontology Saemi Jang, Megawati, Jiyeon Choi, and Mun Yong Yi KIRD, KAIST NLP&DBPEDIA 2015 WORKSHOP

2. Motivation DBpedia extracts structured information from Wikipedia example: Wikipedia page on Pope Saint Felix III dbpedia:Pope_Felix_III dbo:birthPlace dbpedia:Rome dbo:deathPlace dbpedia:Odoacer 2

3. Motivation Errors in DBpedia Incorrect data: type, datatype, value Ambiguity: URI, property Quality of the data has become important Quality of the data has become important rdf:type dbo:Place dbo:Person Error 3 dbpedia:Pope_Felix_III dbo:birthPlace dbpedia:Rome dbo:deathPlace dbpedia:Odoacer

4. Motivation Data Quality Assessment TripleCheckMate [3], LinkQA [6], WIQA [7], DaCura [8] Based on ontology that is built from target data (e.g. DBpedia) But It is not feasible to use for data having no ontology Ontology generation is a difficult and time consuming work Automatic ontology generation works for English and limited domains 4

5. Introduction Goal Quality assessment of linked data without requiring ontology Idea a large portion of the data in a knowledge resource is valid data Analyze the data patterns in resource, take the patterns appearing frequently Evaluate the quality based on the patterns 5

6. Overview of approach 6

7. Quality Assessment Criteria Data Quality Test Pattern (DQTP) DQTP = tuple(V,S) VS V is a set of typed pattern variables, S is a SPARQL query templet RDF triples (subject, predicate, object) Domain Domain is all possible types which can be contained by the subject Range Range is all possible types that can be contained by the object Literal values Literal values ensures a certain data type determined by the property used 7

8. Test Case Pattern Generation Algorithm PropertyObjectObject Type dbo:occupationdbr:Freddie_Mercuryfoaf:Person dbr:Michael_Jacksondbo:Person dbr:Alfred_Nobelfoaf:Person dbr:Alfred_Nobeldbo:Agent Knowledge Resource Check the pattern in knowledge resource STEP 1 Compute appearance ratio of each pattern STEP 2 Select top k pattern & Compute ratio STEP 3 Set threshold (average of top k ratio) STEP 4 Build test case pattern STEP 5 PropertyObjectObject Type dbo:Artistdbr:Freddie_Mercurydbo:Person dbr:Michael_Jacksondbo:Person dbr:Alfred_Nobelfoaf:Person dbr:Alfred_Nobeldbo:Agent PropertyObjectObject Type dbo:deathPlacedbr:Londonschema:Place dbr:Chicagodbo:Place dbr:Parisdbo:Wikidata:Q532 dbr:Seouldbo:Place Example: Range pattern (dbo:deathPlace) PropertyTop 5 typeRatio dbo:occupationdbo:Place32.8004 schema:Place32.8004 dbo:Wikidata:Q53232.8004 dbo:PopulatedPlace0.2368 dbo:Settlement0.2368 PropertyTop 5 typeRatio dbo:deathPlacedbo:Place17.0458 schema:Place17.0458 dbo:Wikidata:Q53217.0458 dbo:PopulatedPlace15.0166 dbo:Settlement13.7303 Average of top 5 ratio = Threshold (e.g. 17%) Test case pattern PropertyPattern type dbo:deathPlacedbo:Place, schema:Place, dbo:Wikidata:Q532 dbo:birthPlacedbo:Place, schema:Place, dbo:Wikidata:Q532 dbo:spousedbo:Person, foaf:Person, schema:Person 8

9. Evaluation of approach 1)Test Case Pattern Generation Compare the approach patterns and the benchmark patterns –Approach generate patterns without using ontology –Benchmark generate patterns using ontology 2)Quality Assessment Accuracy Evaluate a localized DBpedia which does not have ontology 9

10. Validation 1) Test Case Pattern Generation Ground truth RDFUnit [4] compiled a library of data quality test case patterns for quality assessment Ontology of English DBpedia Definition of Test Case Patterns ApproachRDFUnitDefinition Domain Quality Pattern (DQP) RDFSDOMAINThe attribution of a resource's property (with a certain value) is only valid if the resource is of a certain type. Range Quality Pattern (RQP) RDFSRANGEThe attribution of a resource's property is only valid if the value is of a certain type Datatype Quality Pattern (TQP) RDFSRANGEDThe attribution of a resource's property is only if the literal value has a certain datatype 10

11. Data Test Case Pattern Generation 5 Top 5 type average ratio is 22% for DQP, 17% for RQP For TQP, most of the triples has a single data pattern It generate patterns by triples in DBpedia, but RDFUnit using ontology Validation 1) Test Case Pattern Generation PropertyDQPRQPTQP English DBpedia27501368601739 PatternPropertyPattern type DQP dbo:deathPlace dbo:Agent, dbo:Person RQPdbo:Place, dbo:PopulatedPlace, dbo:Wikidata:Q532 11 DBpedia 2015 ( dbo,dbp)

12. Validation 1) Test Case Pattern Generation 12 DQPRQP TQP Total number of patterns with benchmark 99.289.497.880.2 99.067.7 A: Pattern generation rate B: pattern generation accuracy of approach Total number of generated patterns with approach Total number of consistent patterns with approach

13. Validation 1) Test Case Pattern Generation 13 DQPRQP TQP 99.289.497.880.2 99.067.7 In case of TQP, the patterns have equivalent meanings with RDFUnit. But they comes from different resources. e.g. rdf:langString, xsd:String

14. Validation 2) Quality Assessment Accuracy How to validate the quality assessment accuracy? Approach is able to handle a localized DBpedia and evaluate the quality of data Localized version of DBpedia in 125 languages do not have their ontologies Most of the label of DBpedia Ontology is composed of English label 14

15. Validation 2) Quality Assessment Accuracy Data Localized version of DBpedia (Korean DBpedia) 32 million triples with 18617 different properties 1070 localized properties that are carried by more than 100 triples Test Case Pattern Generation 5 Top 5 type average ratio is 18% for DQP, 16% for RQP For TQP, most of the triples has a single data pattern, not only datatype but also language tag (e.g. @en) PropertyDQPRQPTQP Korean DBpedia1070955317166 PatternPropertyPattern type DQP dbo: 죽은곳 (=deathPlace) dbo:Agent, dbo:Person RQPdbo:Place, dbo:PopulatedPlace, dbo:Wikidata:Q532 15 Korean DBpedia 2015

16. Validation 2) Quality Assessment Accuracy Result of Data Quality Assessment 1438 test case patterns generated by 1070 properties 1.4 million triples tested from Korean Dbpedia TotalDomainRangeDatatype TriplesTC PassErrorTCPassErrorTCPassError 1,492,3312,452,0231,470,3891,075,953394,436613,535176,423437,112368,099309,28658,813 Error rate26.82%71.24%15.97% 16

17. Validation 2) Quality Assessment Accuracy Gold standard data –Randomly selected 1000 triples (95% confidence, 3.5% error) –2 human evaluator (kappa 0.7207) –Annotate correct type of subject, object based on predicate Evaluation measure Precision, recall, and f1-measure Accuracy 17 TriplesPrecisionRecallF1-measure DQP9810.71000.80220.7533 RQP4240.93080.34380.5021 TQP2630.73950.85030.7910

18. Validation 2) Error Analysis Error Analysis on Korean DBpedia The error occurrence rate of total triple is 36.31% The most error cases is rdf:range violation [3,4,18] Literal or string data, not URI Object range validation cannot be performed [4] 18 Pass 63.69% Error 36.31%

19. Validation 2) Error Analysis Error Analysis on Korean DBpedia Incorrect datatype setting date e.g. the date must be set as xs:date, but it is set to xs:integer Incorrect object value e.g. Object value of prop-ko: 활동기간 (=active period) is a period of time, but only the beginning point of the duration Property ambiguity e.g. prop-ko: 종목 (event) can have 2 totally different types on object - the name of event or the number of events 19

20. Limitations Lack of specific domain/range setting e.g. Quality assessment with only one triple e.g. 20 PropertyDQP dbo:deathPlacedbo:Agent, dbo:Person dbpedia:Michael_Jacksondbo:birthDate1958-08-29 (xsd:date) dbo:deathDate1009-06-25 (xsd:date) dbo:birthdate has to be earlier then dbo:deathDate

21. Conclusion Semi-automatically generates patterns from knowledge resource Patterns are instantiated into test cases to measure the quality of data more than 97% patterns are generated by approach This work opens a new possibility of conducting quality assessment without requiring ontology It can apply to any language and any domain 21

22. Ongoing works Utilizing external resources e.g. WordNet, Thesaurus Pattern expansion Create a complete validation system for determining trustworthiness 22

23. Questions? 23

25. Reference Linked data quality assessment [2] Quality assessment methodologies for linked open data. Zaveri, A. et al. Submitted to Semantic Web Journal (2013) [5] Weaving the pedantic web. Hogan, A. et al. (2010) [6] Assessing linked data mappings using network measures. Guéret et al. In The Semantic Web: Research and Applications (pp. 87-102). Springer Berlin Heidelberg (2012) [8] Improving curated web-data quality with structured harvesting and assessment. Feeney et al. International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems (IJSWIS), 10(2), 35-62 (2014) [16] Swiqa-a semantic web information quality assessment framework. Fürber et al. In ECIS (Vol. 15, p. 19) (2011) [17] Using semantic web resources for data quality management. Fürber et al. In Knowledge Engineering and Management by the Masses (pp. 211-225). Springer Berlin Heidelberg (2010) 25

26. Reference Data Quality Assessment of DBpedia [3] User-driven quality evaluation of dbpedia. Zaveri, A. et al. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Semantic Systems (pp. 97-104). ACM (2013) [4] Test-driven evaluation of linked data quality. Kontokostas et al. In Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on World Wide Web (pp. 747-758). ACM (2014) [18] Crowdsourcing linked data quality assessment. Acosta et al. In The Semantic Web{ISWC 2013 (pp. 260-276). Springer Berlin Heidelberg (2013) [19] Detecting incorrect numerical data in dbpedia. Wienand et al. In The Semantic Web: Trends and Challenges (pp. 504- 518). Springer International Publishing (2014) [20] DL-Learner: learning concepts in description logics. Lehmann, J. The Journal of Machine Learning Research, 10, 2639- 2642 (2009) Automatic Ontology generation [13] Automatic ontology generation using schema information. Sie et al. In Web Intelligence, 2006. WI 2006. IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on (pp.526-531). IEEE (2006) [14] Text2Onto. Cimiano et al. In Natural language processing and information systems (pp. 227-238). Springer Berlin Heidelberg (2005) [21] Automatic generation of OWL ontology from XML data source. Yahia et al. arXiv preprint arXiv:1206.0570 (2012) [24] A robust approach to aligning heterogeneous lexical resources. Pilehvar et al. AP A 1 (2014): c2. 26