Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3394231.3397911acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageswebsciConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Preference-driven Control over Incompleteness of Knowledge Graph Query Answers

Published: 06 July 2020 Publication History

Abstract

Entities in today’s knowledge graphs do not only differ in their property values but also in the schematic structures they are represented by. Given their extraction-based foundation, it is quite common that in practical knowledge base instances totally unrelated graph structures describe entities of the same type. Hence, operators for handling such heterogeneity are mandatory when designing a robust query language for knowledge graphs. While SPARQL does offer optional patterns for this purpose, their query answers often suffer from an unintuitive matching behavior. In contrast, preference semantics seem to be a much more intuitive and still robust way of expressing how the optimal query result may look like. While preferences over data value domains are already applied for graph data, we argue for structural preferences to achieve fine-grained control of heterogeneity in the query answers. Therefore, we propose a new operator for SPARQL, enabling the expression of structural as well as some value preferences. Equipped with a Pareto-style semantics, we give examples of how to model preferences with the new operator. Our prototypical implementation allows for evaluating several encodings of the new construct at DBpedia’s SPARQL endpoint.

Supplementary Material

M4V File (3394231.3397911.m4v)
Presentation Video

References

[1]
Marcelo Arenas, Claudio Gutierrez, Daniel P. Miranker, Jorge Pérez, and Juan F. Sequeda. 2013. Querying Semantic Data on the Web?SIGMOD Rec. 41, 4 (2013), 6–17. https://doi.org/10.1145/2430456.2430458
[2]
Marcelo Arenas and Jorge Pérez. 2011. Querying Semantic Web Data with SPARQL. In Proceedings of the Thirtieth ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems(PODS ’11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 305–316. https://doi.org/10.1145/1989284.1989312
[3]
Sören Auer, Christian Bizer, Georgi Kobilarov, Jens Lehmann, Richard Cyganiak, and Zachary Ives. 2007. DBpedia: A Nucleus for a Web of Open Data. In The Semantic Web. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 722–735.
[4]
Wolf-Tilo Balke, Ulrich Güntzer, and Jason Xin Zheng. 2004. Efficient Distributed Skylining for Web Information Systems. In Advances in Database Technology - EDBT 2004(Lecture Notes in Computer Science). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 256–273. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-24741-8_16
[5]
Patrick Bosc and Olivier Pivert. 1995. SQLf: a relational database language for fuzzy querying. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 3, 1 (Februar 1995), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1109/91.366566
[6]
Nicolas Bruno, Surajit Chaudhuri, and Luis Gravano. 2002. Top-k Selection Queries over Relational Databases: Mapping Strategies and Performance Evaluation. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 27, 2 (June 2002), 153–187. https://doi.org/10.1145/568518.568519
[7]
Jan Chomicki. 2003. Preference Formulas in Relational Queries. ACM Trans. Database Syst. 28, 4 (December 2003), 427–466. https://doi.org/10.1145/958942.958946
[8]
Marina Gueroussova, Axel Polleres, and Sheila A. McIlraith. 2013. SPARQL with Qualitative and Quantitative Preferences (Extended Report). University of Toronto CSRG Report 619 (October 2013).
[9]
Olaf Hartig and Carlos Buil-Aranda. 2016. Bindings-Restricted Triple Pattern Fragments. In On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems: OTM 2016 Conferences, Christophe Debruyne, Hervé Panetto, Robert Meersman, Tharam Dillon, eva Kühn, Declan O’Sullivan, and Claudio Agostino Ardagna (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 762–779. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48472-3_48
[10]
Ilkcan Keles and Katja Hose. 2019. Skyline Queries over Knowledge Graphs. In The Semantic Web – ISWC 2019, Chiara Ghidini, Olaf Hartig, Maria Maleshkova, Vojtěch Svátek, Isabel Cruz, Aidan Hogan, Jie Song, Maxime Lefrançois, and Fabien Gandon (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 293–310. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30793-6_17
[11]
Werner Kießling. 2002. Foundations of preferences in database systems. In Proceedings of the 28th international conference on Very Large Data Bases(VLDB ’02). VLDB Endowment, Hong Kong, China, 311–322.
[12]
Werner Kießling and Gerhard Köstler. 2002. Chapter 91 - Preference SQL — Design, Implementation, Experiences. In VLDB ’02: Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Very Large Databases, Philip A. Bernstein, Yannis E. Ioannidis, Raghu Ramakrishnan, and Dimitris Papadias (Eds.). Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, 990 – 1001. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-155860869-6/50098-6
[13]
Michael Morse, Jignesh M. Patel, and H. V. Jagadish. 2007. Efficient skyline computation over low-cardinality domains. In Proceedings of the 33rd international conference on Very large data bases(VLDB ’07). VLDB Endowment, Vienna, Austria, 267–278.
[14]
Mohamed Morsey, Jens Lehmann, Sören Auer, and Axel-Cyrille Ngonga Ngomo. 2011. DBpedia SPARQL Benchmark - Performance Assessment with Real Queries on Real Data. In The Semantic Web - ISWC 2011. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 454–469. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25073-6_29
[15]
Peter F. Patel-Schneider, Axel Polleres, and David Martin. 2018. Comparative Preferences in SPARQL. In Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management, Catherine Faron Zucker, Chiara Ghidini, Amedeo Napoli, and Yannick Toussaint (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 289–305. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03667-6_19
[16]
Olivier Pivert, Olfa Slama, and Virginie Thion. 2016. SPARQL Extensions with Preferences: A Survey. In Proceedings of the 31st Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (Pisa, Italy) (SAC ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1015–1020. https://doi.org/10.1145/2851613.2851690
[17]
Jorge Pérez, Marcelo Arenas, and Claudio Gutierrez. 2009. Semantics and Complexity of SPARQL. ACM Transactions on Database Systems 34, 3 (August 2009). https://doi.org/10.1145/1567274.1567278
[18]
Eric Prud’hommeaux and Andy Seaborne. 2008. SPARQL Query Language for RDF. W3C Recommendation. http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-rdf-sparql-query-20080115/.
[19]
Michael Schmidt, Michael Meier, and Georg Lausen. 2008. Foundations of SPARQL Query Optimization. arXiv:0812.3788 [cs](2008). http://arxiv.org/abs/0812.3788
[20]
Guus Schreiber and Yves Raimond. 2014. RDF 1.1 Primer. Technical Report. W3C.
[21]
Wolf Siberski, Jeff Z. Pan, and Uwe Thaden. 2006. Querying the Semantic Web with Preferences. In The Semantic Web - ISWC 2006, Isabel Cruz, Stefan Decker, Dean Allemang, Chris Preist, Daniel Schwabe, Peter Mika, Mike Uschold, and Lora M. Aroyo(Eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 612–624. https://doi.org/10.1007/11926078_44
[22]
Antonis Troumpoukis, Stasinos Konstantopoulos, and Angelos Charalambidis. 2017. An Extension of SPARQL for Expressing Qualitative Preferences. In The Semantic Web – ISWC 2017, Claudia d’Amato, Miriam Fernandez, Valentina Tamma, Freddy Lecue, Philippe Cudré-Mauroux, Juan Sequeda, Christoph Lange, and Jeff Heflin (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 711–727. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68288-4_42
[23]
W3C SPARQL Working Group. 2013. SPARQL 1.1 Overview. W3C Recommendation. http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/REC-sparql11-overview-20130321/. All contributers listed at https://www.w3.org/TR/sparql11-overview/#Acknowledgements.

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
WebSci '20: Proceedings of the 12th ACM Conference on Web Science
July 2020
361 pages
ISBN:9781450379892
DOI:10.1145/3394231
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 06 July 2020

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. SPARQL
  2. incompleteness
  3. knowledge graphs
  4. preference queries

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed limited

Conference

WebSci '20
Sponsor:
WebSci '20: 12th ACM Conference on Web Science
July 6 - 10, 2020
Southampton, United Kingdom

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 245 of 933 submissions, 26%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • 0
    Total Citations
  • 86
    Total Downloads
  • Downloads (Last 12 months)14
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
Reflects downloads up to 03 Oct 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

View Options

Get Access

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

HTML Format

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media