OWL 2 Update. Christine Golbreich

Similar documents
OWL 2 The Next Generation. Ian Horrocks Information Systems Group Oxford University Computing Laboratory

Mandatory exercises. INF3580/4580 Semantic Technologies Spring 2017 Lecture 12: OWL: Loose Ends. Outline. Make it simple!

COMP718: Ontologies and Knowledge Bases

OWL 2 Profiles. An Introduction to Lightweight Ontology Languages. Markus Krötzsch University of Oxford. Reasoning Web 2012

Main topics: Presenter: Introduction to OWL Protégé, an ontology editor OWL 2 Semantic reasoner Summary TDT OWL

OWL and tractability. Based on slides from Ian Horrocks and Franz Baader. Combining the strengths of UMIST and The Victoria University of Manchester

OWL 2 Syntax and Semantics Sebastian Rudolph

Bryan Smith May 2010

The OWL API: An Introduction

Presented By Aditya R Joshi Neha Purohit

INF3580 Semantic Technologies Spring 2012

FOUNDATIONS OF SEMANTIC WEB TECHNOLOGIES

Web Ontology Language (OWL)

OWL a glimpse. OWL a glimpse (2) requirements for ontology languages. requirements for ontology languages

Table of Contents. iii

Semantic Web Technologies: Web Ontology Language

! Assessed assignment 1 Due 17 Feb. 3 questions Level 10 students answer Q1 and one other

Suitability of a KR for OBDM

Ontological Modeling: Part 7

Scalable Ontology-Based Information Systems

Semantic reasoning for dynamic knowledge bases. Lionel Médini M2IA Knowledge Dynamics 2018

Description Logics and OWL

OWL 2 Profiles. An Introduction to Lightweight Ontology Languages. Маркус Крёч (Markus Krötzsch) University of Oxford. KESW Summer School 2012

Introduction to Protégé. Federico Chesani, 18 Febbraio 2010

Knowledge Representation for the Semantic Web

Modularity in Ontologies: Introduction (Part A)

Week 4. COMP62342 Sean Bechhofer, Uli Sattler

Stream Reasoning For Linked Data

Helmi Ben Hmida Hannover University, Germany

Description Logic. Eva Mráková,

Ontological Modeling: Part 11

Semantic Web. Tahani Aljehani

GraphOnto: OWL-Based Ontology Management and Multimedia Annotation in the DS-MIRF Framework

SOWL QL : Querying Spatio-Temporal Ontologies In OWL 2.0

Next Steps for OWL. University of Manchester, UK 2 Bell Labs Research, NJ (USA)

CSc 8711 Report: OWL API

Developing Biomedical Ontologies using Protégé

Semantic Web. Ontology and OWL. Morteza Amini. Sharif University of Technology Fall 95-96

The OWL Full/DL gap in the field

l A family of logic based KR formalisms l Distinguished by: l Decidable fragments of FOL l Closely related to Propositional Modal & Dynamic Logics

Overview. Pragmatics of RDF/OWL. The notion of ontology. Disclaimer. Ontology types. Ontologies and data models

Ontological Modeling: Part 13

jcel: A Modular Rule-based Reasoner

Implementing OWL 2 RL and OWL 2 QL rule-sets for OWLIM

H1 Spring B. Programmers need to learn the SOAP schema so as to offer and use Web services.

OWL an Ontology Language for the Semantic Web

Ontological Modeling: Part 14

Orchestrating Music Queries via the Semantic Web

Knowledge Representations. How else can we represent knowledge in addition to formal logic?

Semantic Web in Depth: Web Ontology Language (OWL) Dr Nicholas Gibbins 32/3019

Pragmatics of RDF/OWL

OWL Tutorial. LD4P RareMat / ARTFrame Meeting Columbia University January 11-12, 2018

Report from the W3C Semantic Web Best Practices Working Group

OWL 2: The Next Step for OWL

Multi-agent and Semantic Web Systems: RDF Data Structures

Introducing Customised Datatypes and Datatype Predicates into OWL ( )

Parallel and Distributed Reasoning for RDF and OWL 2

Languages and tools for building and using ontologies. Simon Jupp, James Malone

Simplified Approach for Representing Part-Whole Relations in OWL-DL Ontologies

OWL Rules, OK? Ian Horrocks Network Inference Carlsbad, CA, USA

1. Introduction to SWRL

A Knowledge-Based System for the Specification of Variables in Clinical Trials

The (Not So) Easy Task of Computing Class Subsumptions in OWL RL

Representation of UML Class Diagrams in OWL 2 on the Background of Domain Ontologies

Henrihs Gorskis Riga Technical University

Searching for the Holy Grail. Ian Horrocks Information Systems Group Oxford University Computing Laboratory

Semantic Web Ontologies

Ontologies and OWL. Riccardo Rosati. Knowledge Representation and Semantic Technologies

SEMANTIC WEB DATA MANAGEMENT. from Web 1.0 to Web 3.0

Graph Data Management & The Semantic Web

Ontologies and The Earth System Grid

ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32 N 1108

Local Closed World Reasoning with OWL 2

Semantic Query Answering with Time-Series Graphs

OWLET: An Object-Oriented Environment for OWL Ontology Management

OWL 2 Web Ontology Language: Structural Specification and Functional-Style Syntax

Semantic Web Fundamentals

Stream Reasoning For Linked Data

Standardization of Ontologies

Semantic Web. MPRI : Web Data Management. Antoine Amarilli Friday, January 11th 1/29

WHY WE NEED AN XML STANDARD FOR REPRESENTING BUSINESS RULES. Introduction. Production rules. Christian de Sainte Marie ILOG

Challenges in the Core of Ontology Support Systems

OWL 2. Web Ontology Language. Some material adapted from presenta0ons by Ian Horrocks and by Feroz Farazi

Ontological Modeling: Part 8

Description Logic: A Formal Foundation for Ontology Languages and Tools

Contents. G52IWS: The Semantic Web. The Semantic Web. Semantic web elements. Semantic Web technologies. Semantic Web Services

CHAPTER 2. Overview of Tools and Technologies in Ontology Development

Automatic Transformation of Relational Database Schema into OWL Ontologies

Semantic Web Tools. Federico Chesani 18 Febbraio 2010

Logic and Reasoning in the Semantic Web (part I RDF/RDFS)

JENA: A Java API for Ontology Management

Semantic Web. Ontology Pattern. Gerd Gröner, Matthias Thimm. Institute for Web Science and Technologies (WeST) University of Koblenz-Landau

CHRONOS: A Reasoning Engine for Qualitative Temporal Information in OWL

12th ICCRTS. On the Automated Generation of an OWL Ontology based on the Joint C3 Information Exchange Data Model (JC3IEDM)

Ontology mutation testing

On the Reduction of Dublin Core Metadata Application Profiles to Description Logics and OWL

A Tool for Storing OWL Using Database Technology

Description Logic Programs: Overview for DAML and WebOnt

Adding formal semantics to the Web

Extracting knowledge from Ontology using Jena for Semantic Web

Transcription:

OWL 2 Update Christine Golbreich <cgolbrei@gmail.com> 1

OWL 2 W3C OWL working group is developing OWL 2 see http://www.w3.org/2007/owl/wiki/ Extends OWL with a small but useful set of features Fully backwards compatible with OWL: Every OWL ontology is a valid OWL 2 ontology Every OWL 2 ontology not using new features is a valid OWL ontology A community effort features included are those That are needed in applications For which semantics and reasoning techniques are well understood That tool builders are willing and able to support Already supported by many popular OWL tools Protégé, Swoop, TopBraid Composer, FaCT++, Pellet, OWL API 2

What s New in OWL 2? OWL 2 is an update to OWL adding several new features Increased expressive power, e.g., w.r.t. properties Extended support for datatypes Simple metamodelling capabilities Extended annotation capabilities Database style keys OWL 2 also defines several profiles language subsets that may better meet certain performance requirements or may be easier to implement 3

Increased expressive power Qualified cardinality restrictions Minimum, Maximum, or Exact - Object or Data Property - Qualified or not E.g., Set of objects bound to at most three Hydrogen MaxCardinality( 3 boundto Hydrogen) MinCardinality( 1 hasssn) Property chain inclusion axioms allows to chain several object properties E.g., If x is locatedin y, and y is partof z, then x is locatedin z; SubPropertyOf( PropertyChain( locatedinpartof ) locatedin ) provides a means to represent some types of rules under certain global restrictions on axioms for decidability E.g., the Uncle rule! SubPropertyOf( PropertyChain ( hasparenthasbrother) hasuncle) 4

Increased expressive power Reflexive, Irreflexive, Asymmetric E.g., each one has the same blood group as himself ReflexiveProperty( hassamebloodgroup ) E.g., Nothing can be a proper part of itself IrreflexiveProperty( proper_part_of ) E.g., if x is preceded by y, then y cannot be preceded by x AsymmetricProperty( preceded_by ) [e.g., process] Local reflexivity E.g., Auto-regulating processes regulate themselves SubClassOf( AutoRegulatingProcess ExistsSelf( regulate) ) Disjoint properties E.g., no individuals can be both homozygous and heterozygous twins DisjointProperties( homozygoustwin heterozygoustwin ) 5

Syntactic sugar DisjointUnion E.g., a brain hemispehere is either a left or right hemisphere but not both DisjointUnion( BrainHemisphereLeftHemisphereRightHemisphere ) DisjointClasses E.g., Middle and upper, middle and lower, upper and lower lungs are exclusive DisjointClasses( MiddleLungUpperLungLowerLung ) NegativePropertyAssertion E.g., This patient is not five years old. NegativePropertyAssertion( hasagethispatient 5^^xsd:integer ) 6

Extended datatypes A richer set of datatypes for representing various kinds of numbers, adding support of a wider range of XML Schema Datatypes E.g.; integer, real, double, float, decimal, strings with a Language Tag (or without) E.g.; the class with ID 0000003 has label anatomical structure in English EntityAnnotation(Class(CARO:0000003) Label( anatomical structure @en)) Boolean values, Binary Data, URIs, Time Instants, etc. Datatype restriction User-defined datatypes using facets from XML Schema Datatypes for range E.g.; Individuals that are more than 18 DatatypeRestriction(xsd:integer mininclusive "18"^^xsd:integer) 7

Simple metamodelling Based on punning The same name can refer to different types of entities, with certain restrictions E.g., both individual and : class datatype object property data property annotation property Punning forbidden for ObjectProperty DatatypeProperty Class Datatype Declaration( Class( Deprecated_Properties ) ) Declaration( ObjectProperty( located_in ) ) ClassAssertion( Deprecated_Properties located_in ) Declares Deprecated_Properties to be a Class Declares located_in to be an ObjectProperty states that located_in is an Individual of the class Deprecated_Properties. 8

Extended annotations Annotations of axioms as well as entities E.g., SubClassOf( Comment("Middle lobe are necessary right lobe.") MiddleLobe RightLobe) Even annotations of annotations Value of an annotation can be either a literal (e.g., string, integer, or any other OWL datatype) E.g. EntityAnnotation (Class(CARO: anatomical structure) hasid( "0000003"^^xsd:integer )) an ontology entity (such as a class or individual) an anonymous individual 9

Keys OWL 2 allows to define Database style keys for a given class A HasKey axiom states that each (named) instance of a class is uniquely identified by a property or a set of properties if two (named) instances coincide on all the values of key properties, then these two individuals are the same. E.g., Each person is uniquely identified by his social security number. HasKey( Person hasssn ) 10

Profiles (Tractable Fragments) Profile is a subset of vocabulary (fragment) OWL 1 defines only one fragment (OWL Lite) And it isn t very tractable! OWL 2 defines several different fragments with Useful computational properties E.g., reasoning complexity in range LOGSPACE to PTIME Useful implementation possibilities E.g., Smaller fragments implementable using RDBs OWL 2 profiles OWL 2 EL, OWL 2 QL, OWL 2 RL 11

OWL 2 EL Useful for applications employing ontologies that contain very large number of properties and/or classes Captures expressive power used by many large-scale ontologies E.g.; SNOMED CT, NCI thesaurus Features Included: existential restrictions, intersection, subclass, equivalentclass, disjointness, range and domain, object property inclusion possibly involving property chains, and data property inclusion, transitive properties, keys Missing: include value restrictions, Cardinality restrictions (min, max and exact), disjunction and negation Maximal language for which reasoning (including query answering) known to be worst-case polynomial 12

OWL 2 QL Useful for applications that use very large volumes of data, and where query answering is the most important task Captures expressive power of simple ontologies like thesauri, classifications, and (most of) expressive power of ER/UML schemas E.g., CIM10, Thesaurus of Nephrology,... Features Included: limited form of existential restrictions, subclass, equivalentclass, disjointness, range & domain, symmetric properties, Missing: existential quantification to a class, self restriction, nominals, universal quantification to a class, disjunction etc. Can be implemented on top of standard relational DBMS Maximal language for which reasoning (including query answering) is known to be worst case logspace (same as DB) 13

OWL 2 RL Useful for applications that require scalable reasoning without sacrifying too much expressive power, and where query answering is the most important task Support most OWL features but with restrictions placed on the syntax of OWL 2 standard semantics only apply when they are used in a restricted way Can be implemented on top of rule extended DBMS E.g., Oracle s OWL Prime implemented using forward chaining rules in Oracle 11g Related to DLP [DLP] and pd* [pd*] Allows for scalable (polynomial) reasoning using rule-based technologies 14

OWL 2 Public Working Drafts Seven OWL 2 Drafts Published (2008-10-08) W3C News http://www.w3.org/ 2008-10-08: The OWL Working Group published seven documents relating to the OWL 2 Web Ontology Language 1. Structural Specification and Functional-Style Syntax 2. Direct Semantics 3. RDF-Based Semantics (First Public Draft) 4. Mapping to RDF Graphs 5. XML Serialization 6. Profiles 7. Conformance and Test Cases (First Public Draft) 15

OWL 2 Public Working Drafts Seven OWL 2 Drafts Published (2008-10-08) see http://www.w3.org/2007/owl/wiki/owl_working_group#deliverables First three documents form the technical core of OWL 2 specifying its 1. Syntax: both the structure of the language and its functional-style syntax 2. & 3. Semantics: both a traditional "direct" and a new "RDF-based" semantics Documents 4 & 5 specify two different serializations for OWL ontologies one based on a Mapping to RDF and one using XML more directly Document 6 defines the Profiles Document 7 specifies Conformance and will later enumerate Test cases Five other documents are under development 16

Thank you for listening Thanks to Ian Horrocks (slides) & OWL WG (work) OWL 2 Public Working Drafts on Wiki http://www.w3.org/2007/owl/wiki/owl_working_group#deliverables 17

Any questions? 18