Abstract
For the purpose of verifying given data sets with respect to semantic criteria, OWL-based ontologies from the problem domain can be combined with verification rules expressed in the Semantic Web Rule Language (SWRL). Whenever a verification fails the user needs support for identifying the SWRL rule atoms leading to the observed failure. We present an approach that derives so-called Semantic Constraints (SCs) from the verification rules in order to spot the errors within the given data set. This procedure has the advantage of continuously retaining the Open World Assumption (OWA) within the entire modeling process. SCs are derived from SWRL rules by a stepwise reduction of the rules’ content. Though our approach is generic, we draw our examples from the domain of railway infrastructure planning.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Lodemann, M., Luttenberger, N.: Ontology-based Railway Infrastructure Verification – Planning Benefits. In: International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Sharing (KMIS 2010) Proceedings, pp. 176–181. Scitepress (2010)
W3C OWL Working Group: OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Document Overview. W3C Recommendation (2009), http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-overview/
Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.F., Boley, H., Tabet, S., Grosof, B., Dean, M.: SWRL: A Semantic Web Rule Language combining OWL and RuleML. W3C Member Submission (2004), http://www.w3.org/Submission/SWRL/
Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.F., Bechhofer, S., Tsarkov, D.: OWL Rules: A Proposal and Prototype Implementation. Journal of Web Semantics 1(3), 23–40 (2005) ISSN 1570-8268
Patel-Schneider, P.F.: Safe Rules for OWL 1.1 (Statement of Interest). In: SoI: OWL: Experiences and Directions 2008, OWLED 2008, Washington DC, USA (2008)
Stanford University: Protégé - An Open Source Ontology Editor. Stanford University School of Medicine (2011), http://protege.stanford.edu
Nash, A., Huerlimann, D., Schuette, J., Krauss, V.: railML - A Standard Data Interface for Railroad Applications. In: Proc. of the 9th International Conference on Computer in Railways, Comprail IX, vol. 15(5), pp. 233–240 (2004)
Motik, B., Horrocks, I., Sattler, U.: Bridging the Gap between OWL and Relational Databases. Journal of Web Semantics 7, 74–89 (2009), doi:10.1016/j.websem.2009.02.001
Motik, B., Horrocks, I., Sattler, U.: Adding Integrity Constraints to OWL. In: OWL: Experiences and Directions, OWLED 2007, Innsbruck, Austria (2007)
Prud’hommeaux, E., Seaborne, A.: SPARQL Query Language for RDF. W3C Recommendation (2008), http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/
Knublauch, H., Hendler, J.A., Idehen, K.: SPIN - Overview and Motivation. W3C Member Submission (2011), http://www.w3.org/Submission/spin-overview/
Tao, J., Sirin, E., McGuinness, D.L.: Integrity Constraints in OWL. In: Proc.: Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI 2010), Atlanta, USA (2010)
Sirin, E., Parsia, B., Cuenca Grau, B., Kalyanpur, A., Katz, Y.: Pellet: A practical OWL-DL reasoner. Journal of Web Semantics 5(2), 51–53 (2007), doi:10.1016/j.websem.2007.03.004
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Lodemann, M., Marnau, R., Luttenberger, N. (2012). Using Semantic Constraints for Data Verification in an Open World. In: Lukose, D., Ahmad, A.R., Suliman, A. (eds) Knowledge Technology. KTW 2011. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 295. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32826-8_21
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32826-8_21
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-32825-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-32826-8
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)