Mantas Šimkus

Shqiponja Ahmetaj, Iovka Boneva, Jan Hidders et al.

As schema languages for RDF data become more mature, we are seeing efforts to extend them with recursive semantics, applying diverse ideas from logic programming and description logics. While ShEx has an official recursive semantics based on greatest fixpoints (GFP), the discussion for SHACL is ongoing and seems to be converging towards least fixpoints (LFP). A practical study we perform shows that, indeed, ShEx validators implement GFP, whereas SHACL validators are more heterogeneous. This situation creates tension between ShEx and SHACL, as their semantic commitments appear to diverge, potentially undermining interoperability and predictability. We aim to clarify this design space by comparing the main semantic options in a principled yet accessible way, hoping to engage both theoreticians and practitioners, especially those involved in developing tools and standards. We present a unifying formal semantics that treats LFP, GFP, and supported model semantics (SMS), clarifying their relationships and highlighting a duality between LFP and GFP on stratified fragments. Next, we investigate to which extent the directions taken by SHACL and ShEx are compatible. We show that, although ShEx and SHACL seem to be going in different directions, they include large fragments with identical expressive power. Moreover, there is a strong correspondence between these fragments through the aforementioned principle of duality. Finally, we present a complete picture of the data and combined complexity of ShEx and SHACL validation under LFP, GFP, and SMS, showing that SMS comes at a higher computational cost under standard complexity-theoretic assumptions.

Anouk Oudshoorn, Magdalena Ortiz, Mantas Simkus

SHACL (Shapes Constraint Language) expresses constraints on RDF data by means of so-called shapes. Its central service is validation: verifying whether a data graph complies with a SHACL document. But so far, there are no static analysis services to compare documents. In this paper, we study the following problem: decide whether all graphs that validate one SHACL document also validate another. Unlike previous works that have considered the implication of shape expressions only, we consider documents comprising (recursive) shape definitions and targets. We show that implication (a.k.a. containment) is undecidable under the supported and the stable model semantics, even for the fragment that uses the description logic ALCIO for shape expressions. Under the well-founded semantics, in surprising contrast, it is decidable in single exponential time. Our key technical contribution is a translation of SHACL under the well-founded semantics into the full hybrid mu-calculus, revealing a novel link between well-founded models and a fixed point modal logic, and a worst-case optimal automata-based decision procedure.

S. Ahmetaj, I. Boneva, J. Hidders et al.

Graphs have emerged as an important foundation for a variety of applications, including capturing and reasoning over factual knowledge, semantic data integration, social networks, and providing factual knowledge for machine learning algorithms. To formalise certain properties of the data and to ensure data quality, there is a need to describe the schema of such graphs. Because of the breadth of applications and availability of different data models, such as RDF and property graphs, both the Semantic Web and the database community have independently developed graph schema languages: SHACL, ShEx, and PG-Schema. Each language has its unique approach to defining constraints and validating graph data, leaving potential users in the dark about their commonalities and differences. In this paper, we provide formal, concise definitions of the core components of each of these schema languages. We employ a uniform framework to facilitate a comprehensive comparison between the languages and identify a common set of functionalities, shedding light on both overlapping and distinctive features of the three languages.

Shqiponja Ahmetaj, George Konstantinidis, Magdalena Ortiz et al.

SHACL (SHApe Constraint Language) is a W3C standardized constraint language for RDF graphs. In this paper, we study SHACL validation in RDF graphs under updates. We present a SHACL-based update language that can capture intuitive and realistic modifications on RDF graphs and study the problem of static validation under such updates. This problem asks to verify whether every graph that validates a SHACL specification will still do so after applying a given update sequence. More importantly, it provides a basis for further services for reasoning about evolving RDF graphs. Using a regression technique that embeds the update actions into SHACL constraints, we show that static validation under updates can be reduced to (un)satisfiability of constraints in (a minor extension of) SHACL. We analyze the computational complexity of the static validation problem for SHACL and some key fragments. Finally, we present a prototype implementation that performs static validation and other static analysis tasks on SHACL constraints and demonstrate its behavior through preliminary experiments.

Anouk Oudshoorn, Magdalena Ortiz, Mantas Simkus

SHACL and OWL are two prominent W3C standards for managing RDF data. These languages share many features, but they have one fundamental difference: OWL, designed for inferring facts from incomplete data, makes the open-world assumption, whereas SHACL is a constraint language that treats the data as complete and must be validated under the closed-world assumption. The combination of both formalisms is very appealing and has been called for, but their semantic gap is a major challenge, semantically and computationally. In this paper, we advocate a semantics for SHACL validation in the presence of ontologies based on core universal models. We provide a technique for constructing these models for ontologies in the rich data-tractable description logic Horn-ALCHIQ. Furthermore, we use a finite representation of this model to develop a rewriting technique that reduces SHACL validation in the presence of ontologies to standard validation. Finally, we study the complexity of SHACL validation in the presence of ontologies, and show that even very simple ontologies make the problem EXPTIME-complete, and PTIME-complete in data complexity.

Nadia Labai, Magdalena Ortiz, Mantas Šimkus

Concrete domains, especially those that allow to compare features with numeric values, have long been recognized as a very desirable extension of description logics (DLs), and significant efforts have been invested into adding them to usual DLs while keeping the complexity of reasoning in check. For expressive DLs and in the presence of general TBoxes, for standard reasoning tasks like consistency, the most general decidability results are for the so-called $ω$-admissible domains, which are required to be dense. Supporting non-dense domains for features that range over integers or natural numbers remained largely open, despite often being singled out as a highly desirable extension. The decidability of some extensions of $\mathcal{ALC}$ with non-dense domains has been shown, but existing results rely on powerful machinery that does not allow to infer any elementary bounds on the complexity of the problem. In this paper, we study an extension of $\mathcal{ALC}$ with a rich integer domain that allows for comparisons (between features, and between features and constants coded in unary), and prove that consistency can be solved using automata-theoretic techniques in single exponential time, and thus has no higher worst-case complexity than standard $\mathcal{ALC}$. Our upper bounds apply to some extensions of DLs with concrete domains known from the literature, support general TBoxes, and allow for comparing values along paths of ordinary (not necessarily functional) roles.

Shqiponja Ahmetaj, Magdalena Ortiz, Mantas Simkus

In many scenarios, complete and incomplete information coexist. For this reason, the knowledge representation and database communities have long shown interest in simultaneously supporting the closed- and the open-world views when reasoning about logic theories. Here we consider the setting of querying possibly incomplete data using logic theories, formalized as the evaluation of an ontology-mediated query (OMQ) that pairs a query with a theory, sometimes called an ontology, expressing background knowledge. This can be further enriched by specifying a set of closed predicates from the theory that are to be interpreted under the closed-world assumption, while the rest are interpreted with the open-world view. In this way we can retrieve more precise answers to queries by leveraging the partial completeness of the data. The central goal of this paper is to understand the relative expressiveness of OMQ languages in which the ontology is written in the expressive Description Logic (DL) ALCHOI and includes a set of closed predicates. We consider a restricted class of conjunctive queries. Our main result is to show that every query in this non-monotonic query language can be translated in polynomial time into Datalog with negation under the stable model semantics. To overcome the challenge that Datalog has no direct means to express the existential quantification present in ALCHOI, we define a two-player game that characterizes the satisfaction of the ontology, and design a Datalog query that can decide the existence of a winning strategy for the game. If there are no closed predicates, that is in the case of querying a plain ALCHOI knowledge base, our translation yields a positive disjunctive Datalog program of polynomial size. To the best of our knowledge, unlike previous translations for related fragments with expressive (non-Horn) DLs, these are the first polynomial time translations.

Medina Andreşel, Yazmin Ibáñez-García, Magdalena Ortiz et al.

In ontology-based data access (OBDA), ontologies have been successfully employed for querying possibly unstructured and incomplete data. In this paper, we advocate using ontologies not only to formulate queries and compute their answers, but also for modifying queries by relaxing or restraining them, so that they can retrieve either more or less answers over a given dataset. Towards this goal, we first illustrate that some domain knowledge that could be naturally leveraged in OBDA can be expressed using complex role inclusions (CRI). Queries over ontologies with CRI are not first-order (FO) rewritable in general. We propose an extension of DL-Lite with CRI, and show that conjunctive queries over ontologies in this extension are FO rewritable. Our main contribution is a set of rules to relax and restrain conjunctive queries (CQs). Firstly, we define rules that use the ontology to produce CQs that are relaxations/restrictions over any dataset. Secondly, we introduce a set of data-driven rules, that leverage patterns in the current dataset, to obtain more fine-grained relaxations and restrictions.

Shqiponja Ahmetaj, Diego Calvanese, Magdalena Ortiz et al.

In this paper, we consider the setting of graph-structured data that evolves as a result of operations carried out by users or applications. We study different reasoning problems, which range from ensuring the satisfaction of a given set of integrity constraints after a given sequence of updates, to deciding the (non-)existence of a sequence of actions that would take the data to an (un)desirable state, starting either from a specific data instance or from an incomplete description of it. We consider an action language in which actions are finite sequences of conditional insertions and deletions of nodes and labels, and use Description Logics for describing integrity constraints and (partial) states of the data. We then formalize the above data management problems as a static verification problem and several planning problems. We provide algorithms and tight complexity bounds for the formalized problems, both for an expressive DL and for a variant of DL-Lite.

Meghyn Bienvenu, Diego Calvanese, Magdalena Ortiz et al.

Two-way regular path queries (2RPQs) have received increased attention recently due to their ability to relate pairs of objects by flexibly navigating graph-structured data. They are present in property paths in SPARQL 1.1, the new standard RDF query language, and in the XML query language XPath. In line with XPath, we consider the extension of 2RPQs with nesting, which allows one to require that objects along a path satisfy complex conditions, in turn expressed through (nested) 2RPQs. We study the computational complexity of answering nested 2RPQs and conjunctions thereof (CN2RPQs) in the presence of domain knowledge expressed in description logics (DLs). We establish tight complexity bounds in data and combined complexity for a variety of DLs, ranging from lightweight DLs (DL-Lite, EL) up to highly expressive ones. Interestingly, we are able to show that adding nesting to (C)2RPQs does not affect worst-case data complexity of query answering for any of the considered DLs. However, in the case of lightweight DLs, adding nesting to 2RPQs leads to a surprising jump in combined complexity, from P-complete to Exp-complete.