skip to main content
research-article

Fast Query Answering over Existential Rules

Authors Info & Claims
Published:27 March 2019Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Enhancing Datalog with existential quantification gives rise to Datalog, a powerful knowledge representation language widely used in ontology-based query answering. In this setting, a conjunctive query is evaluated over a Datalog program consisting of extensional data paired with so-called “existential” rules. Owing to their high expressiveness, such rules make the evaluation of queries undecidable, even when the latter are atomic. Decidable generalizations of Datalog by existential rules have been proposed in the literature (such as weakly acyclic and weakly guarded); but they pay the price of higher computational complexity, hindering the implementation of effective systems. Conversely, the results in this article demonstrate that it is definitely possible to enable fast yet powerful query answering over existential rules that strictly generalize Datalog by ensuring decidability without any complexity overhead. On the theoretical side, we define the class of parsimonious programs that guarantees decidability of atomic queries. We then strengthen this class to strongly parsimonious programs ensuring decidability also for conjunctive queries. Since parsimony is an undecidable property, we single out Shy, an easily recognizable class of strongly parsimonious programs that generalizes Datalog while preserving its complexity even under conjunctive queries. Shy also generalizes the class of linear existential programs, while it is uncomparable to the other main classes ensuring decidability. On the practical side, we exploit our results to implement DLV, an effective system for query answering over parsimonious existential rules. To assess its efficiency, we carry out an experimental analysis, evaluating DLV performances for ontology-based query answering on both real-world and synthetic ontologies.

References

  1. Serge Abiteboul, Richard Hull, and Victor Vianu. 1995. Foundations of Databases: The Logical Level. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Andrea Acciarri, Diego Calvanese, Giuseppe De Giacomo, Domenico Lembo, Maurizio Lenzerini, Mattia Palmieri, and Riccardo Rosati. 2005. QUONTO: Querying ontologies. In Proceedings of AAAI’05, Vol. 4. AAAI Press, 1670--1671. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Mario Alviano, Wolfgang Faber, Nicola Leone, and Marco Manna. 2012. Disjunctive Datalog with existential quantifiers: Semantics, decidability, and complexity issues. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 12, 4-5 (2012), 701--718. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Mario Alviano, Michael Morak, and Andreas Pieris. 2017. Stable model semantics for tuple-generating dependencies revisited. In Proceedings of PODS’17. ACM, 377--388. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Mario Alviano and Andreas Pieris. 2015. Default negation for non-guarded existential rules. In Proceedings of PODS’15. ACM, 79--90. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Alessandro Artale, Diego Calvanese, Roman Kontchakov, and Michael Zakharyaschev. 2009. The DL-Lite family and relations. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 36 (2009), 1--69. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Franz Baader, Sebastian Brandt, and Carsten Lutz. 2005. Pushing the EL envelope. In Proceedings of IJCAI’05. AAAI Press, 364--369. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Jean-François Baget, Michel Leclère, Marie-Laure Mugnier, and Eric Salvat. 2011. On rules with existential variables: Walking the decidability line. Artificial Intelligence 175, 9-10 (2011), 1620--1654. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Jean-François Baget, Marie-Laure Mugnier, Sebastian Rudolph, and Michaël Thomazo. 2011. Walking the complexity lines for generalized guarded existential rules. In Proceedings of IJCAI’11. AAAI Press, 712--717. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Jean-François Baget, Michel Leclère, and Marie-Laure Mugnier. 2010. Walking the decidability line for rules with existential variables. In Proceedings of KR’10. AAAI Press, 466--476. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Jean-François Baget, Michel Leclère, Marie-Laure Mugnier, Swan Rocher, and Clément Sipieter. 2015. Graal: A toolkit for query answering with existential rules. In Proceedings of RuleML’15. Springer, 328--344.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Jean-François Baget, Michel Leclère, Marie-Laure Mugnier, and Eric Salvat. 2009. Extending decidable cases for rules with existential variables. In Proceedings of IJCAI’09. AAAI Press, 677--682. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Vince Bárány, Georg Gottlob, and Martin Otto. 2014. Querying the guarded fragment. Logical Methods in Computer Science 10, 2 (2014), 1--35.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Catriel Beeri and Moshe Y. Vardi. 1981. The implication problem for data dependencies. In Proceedings of ICALP’81. Springer, 73--85. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Luigi Bellomarini, Emanuel Sallinger, and Georg Gottlob. 2018. The Vadalog system: Datalog-based reasoning for knowledge graphs. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment 11, 9 (2018), 975--987. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Michael Benedikt, George Konstantinidis, Giansalvatore Mecca, Boris Motik, Paolo Papotti, Donatello Santoro, and Efthymia Tsamoura. 2017. Benchmarking the chase. In Proceedings of PODS’17. ACM, 37--52. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Meghyn Bienvenu, Balder ten Cate, Carsten Lutz, and Frank Wolter. 2014. Ontology-based data access: A study through disjunctive Datalog, CSP, and MMSNP. ACM Transactions on Database Systems 39, 4 (2014), 33:1--33:44. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Barry Bishop, Atanas Kiryakov, Damyan Ognyanoff, Ivan Peikov, Zdravko Tashev, and Ruslan Velkov. 2011. OWLIM: A family of scalable semantic repositories. Semantic Web 2 (2011), 33--42. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Pierre Bourhis, Marco Manna, Michael Morak, and Andreas Pieris. 2016. Guarded-based disjunctive tuple-generating dependencies. ACM Transactions on Database Systems 41, 4 (2016), 27:1--27:45. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Pierre Bourhis, Michael Morak, and Andreas Pieris. 2017. Making cross products and guarded ontology languages compatible. In Proceedings of IJCAI’17. ijcai.org, 880--886. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Sebastian Brandt. 2004. Polynomial time reasoning in a description logic with existential restrictions, GCI axioms, and - what else? In Proceedings of PAIS’04. IOS Press, 298--302. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Andrea Calì, Georg Gottlob, and Michael Kifer. 2008. Taming the infinite chase: Query answering under expressive relational constraints. In Proceedings of KR’08. AAAI Press, 70--80. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Andrea Calì, Georg Gottlob, and Michael Kifer. 2013. Taming the infinite chase: Query answering under expressive relational constraints. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 48 (2013), 115--174. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Andrea Calì, Georg Gottlob, and Thomas Lukasiewicz. 2009. A general Datalog-based framework for tractable query answering over ontologies. In Proceedings of PODS’09. ACM, 77--86. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Andrea Calì, Georg Gottlob, and Thomas Lukasiewicz. 2009. Datalog<sup>±</sup>: A unified approach to ontologies and integrity constraints. In Proceedings of ICDT’09. 14--30. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Andrea Calì, Georg Gottlob, and Thomas Lukasiewicz. 2009. Tractable query answering over ontologies with Datalog+/-. In Proceedings of DL Workshop 2009. 1--12.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Andrea Calì, Georg Gottlob, and Thomas Lukasiewicz. 2012. A general Datalog-based framework for tractable query answering over ontologies. Journal of Web Semantics 14 (2012), 57--83. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Andrea Calì, Georg Gottlob, and Andreas Pieris. 2010. Advanced processing for ontological queries. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment 3, 1 (2010), 554--565. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Andrea Calì, Georg Gottlob, and Andreas Pieris. 2010. Query answering under non-guarded rules in Datalog. In Proceedings of RR’10, Vol. 6333. Springer, 1--17. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Andrea Calì, Georg Gottlob, and Andreas Pieris. 2012. Towards more expressive ontology languages: The query answering problem. Artificial Intelligence 193 (2012), 87--128. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Francesco Calimeri, Susanna Cozza, Giovambattista Ianni, and Nicola Leone. 2010. Enhancing ASP by functions: Decidable classes and implementation techniques. In Proceedings of AAAI’10. AAAI Press, 1666--1670. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Diego Calvanese, Benjamin Cogrel, Sarah Komla-Ebri, Roman Kontchakov, Davide Lanti, Martin Rezk, Mariano Rodriguez-Muro, and Guohui Xiao. 2017. Ontop: Answering SPARQL queries over relational databases. Semantic Web 8, 3 (2017), 471--487.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Diego Calvanese, Giuseppe De Giacomo, Domenico Lembo, Maurizio Lenzerini, and Riccardo Rosati. 2007. Tractable reasoning and efficient query answering in description logics: The DL-Lite family. Journal of Automated Reasoning 39, 3 (2007), 385--429. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Diego Calvanese, Giuseppe De Giacomo, Domenico Lembo, Maurizio Lenzerini, and Riccardo Rosati. 2013. Data complexity of query answering in description logics. Artificial Intelligence 195 (2013), 335--360. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Diego Calvanese, Giuseppe De Giacomo, Domenico Lembo, Maurizio Lenzerini, Antonella Poggi, Mariano Rodriguez-Muro, Riccardo Rosati, Marco Ruzzi, and Domenico Fabio Savo. 2011. The MASTRO system for ontology-based data access. Semantic Web 2, 1 (2011), 43--53. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Alexandros Chortaras, Despoina Trivela, and Giorgos Stamou. 2011. Optimized query rewriting for OWL 2 QL. In Proceedings of CADE’11. Springer, 192--206. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Cristina Civili and Riccardo Rosati. 2012. A broad class of first-order rewritable tuple-generating dependencies. In Proceedings of Datalog 2.0 2012. 68--80. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Bernardo Cuenca Grau, Boris Motik, Giorgos Stoilos, and Ian Horrocks. 2012. Completeness guarantees for incomplete ontology. reasoners: Theory and practice. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 43 (2012), 419--476. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Chiara Cumbo, Wolfgang Faber, Gianluigi Greco, and Nicola Leone. 2004. Enhancing the magic-set method for disjunctive Datalog programs. In Proceedings of ICLP’04, Vol. 3132. Springer, 371--385.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Evgeny Dantsin, Thomas Eiter, Georg Gottlob, and Andrei Voronkov. 2001. Complexity and expressive power of logic programming. ACM Computing Surveys 33 (2001), 374--425. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Alin Deutsch, Alan Nash, and Jeff Remmel. 2008. The chase revisited. In Proceedings of PODS’08. ACM, 149--158. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Thomas Eiter, Magdalena Ortiz, Mantas Simkus, Trung-Kien Tran, and Guohui Xiao. 2012. Query rewriting for Horn-SHIQ plus rules. In Proceedings of AAAI’12. AAAI Press, 726--733. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Ronald Fagin, Phokion G. Kolaitis, Renée J. Miller, and Lucian Popa. 2005. Data exchange: Semantics and query answering. Theoretical Computer Science 336, 1 (2005), 89--124. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. O. Febbraro, N. Leone, F. Ricca, G. Terracina, and P. Veltri. 2013. A graphic tool for ontology reasoning under Datalog<sup>&exist;</sup>. In Proceedings of SEBD’13. Curran Associates, 51--62.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Birte Glimm, Ian Horrocks, Carsten Lutz, and Ulrike Sattler. 2008. Conjunctive query answering for the description logic SHIQ. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 31, 1 (2008), 157--204. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Tomasz Gogacz and Jerzy Marcinkowski. 2013. Converging to the chase—a tool for finite controllability. In Proceedings of LICS’13. IEEE Computer Society, 540--549. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Georg Gottlob, André Hernich, Clemens Kupke, and Thomas Lukasiewicz. 2014. Stable model semantics for guarded existential rules and description logics. In Proceedings of KR’14. 258--267. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Georg Gottlob, Stanislav Kikot, Roman Kontchakov, Vladimir V. Podolskii, Thomas Schwentick, and Michael Zakharyaschev. 2014. The price of query rewriting in ontology-based data access. Artificial Intelligence 213 (2014), 42--59. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Georg Gottlob, Marco Manna, and Andreas Pieris. 2013. Combining decidability paradigms for existential rules. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 13, 4-5 (2013), 877--892.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  50. Georg Gottlob, Giorgio Orsi, and Andreas Pieris. 2014. Query rewriting and optimization for ontological databases. ACM Transactions on Database Systems 39, 3 (2014), 25:1--25:46. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Georg Gottlob, Andreas Pieris, and Lidia Tendera. 2013. Querying the guarded fragment with transitivity. In Proceedings of ICALP’13. Springer, 287--298. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. Bernardo Cuenca Grau, Ian Horrocks, Markus Krötzsch, Clemens Kupke, Despoina Magka, Boris Motik, and Zhe Wang. 2013. Acyclicity notions for existential rules and their application to query answering in ontologies. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 47 (2013), 741--808. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  53. Sergio Greco, Francesca Spezzano, and Irina Trubitsyna. 2011. Stratification criteria and rewriting techniques for checking chase termination. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment 4, 11 (2011), 1158--1168.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. Yuanbo Guo, Zhengxiang Pan, and Jeff Heflin. 2005. LUBM: A benchmark for OWL knowledge base systems. Journal of Web Semantics 3 (2005), 158--182. See http://swat.cse.lehigh.edu/projects/lubm/. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  55. V. Haarslev and R. Möller. 2001. RACER system description. In Proceedings of IJCAR’01. Springer, 701--705. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  56. U. Hustadt, B. Motik, and U. Sattler. 2004. Reducing SHIQ-description logic to disjunctive Datalog programs. In Proceedings of KR’04. AAAI Press, 152--162. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. David S. Johnson and Anthony C. Klug. 1984. Testing containment of conjunctive queries under functional and inclusion dependencies. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 28, 1 (1984), 167--189.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  58. Ton Kloks. 1994. Treewidth, Computations and Approximations, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 842. Springer, Berlin.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  59. Mélanie König, Michel Leclere, and Marie-Laure Mugnier. 2015. Query rewriting for existential rules with compiled preorder. In Proceedings of IJCAI’15. AAAI Press, 3106--3112. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  60. Markus Krötzsch and Sebastian Rudolph. 2011. Extending decidable existential rules by joining acyclicity and guardedness. In Proceedings of IJCAI’11. AAAI Press, 963--968. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  61. Nicola Leone, Marco Manna, Giorgio Terracina, and Pierfrancesco Veltri. 2012. Efficiently computable Datalog<sup>&exist;</sup> programs. In Proceedings of KR’12. AAAI Press, 13--23. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  62. Nicola Leone, Gerald Pfeifer, Wolfgang Faber, Thomas Eiter, Georg Gottlob, Simona Perri, and Francesco Scarcello. 2006. The DLV system for knowledge representation and reasoning. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic 7, 3 (2006), 499--562. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  63. Carsten Lutz, Inanç Seylan, David Toman, and Frank Wolter. 2013. The combined approach to OBDA: Taming role hierarchies using filters. In Proceedings of ISWC’13. Springer, 314--330. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  64. David Maier, Alberto O. Mendelzon, and Yehoshua Sagiv. 1979. Testing implications of data dependencies. ACM Transactions on Database Systems 4, 4 (1979), 455--469. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  65. Bruno Marnette. 2009. Generalized schema-mappings: From termination to tractability. In Proceedings of PODS’09. ACM, 13--22. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  66. Michael Meier, Michael Schmidt, and Georg Lausen. 2009. On chase termination beyond stratification. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment 2, 1 (2009), 970--981. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  67. Boris Motik, Rob Shearer, and Ian Horrocks. 2009. Hypertableau reasoning for description logics. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 36 (2009), 165--228. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  68. Marie-Laure Mugnier. 2011. Ontological query answering with existential rules. In Proceedings of RR 2011. 2--23. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  69. Héctor Pérez-Urbina, Ian Horrocks, and Boris Motik. 2009. Efficient query answering for OWL 2. In Proceedings of ISWC’09. Springer, 489--504. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  70. Héctor Pérez-Urbina, Boris Motik, and Ian Horrocks. 2010. Tractable query answering and rewriting under description logic constraints. Journal of Applied Logic 8, 2 (2010), 186--209.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  71. Mariano Rodriguez-Muro and Diego Calvanese. 2011. Dependencies: Making ontology based data access work in practice. In Proceedings of AMW’11, Vol. 477. CEUR-WS.org, 1--12.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  72. Mariano Rodriguez-Muro and Diego Calvanese. 2011. Dependencies to optimize ontology based data access. In Proceedings of DL Workshop’11, Vol. 745. CEUR-WS.org, 1--11.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  73. Riccardo Rosati. 2007. On conjunctive query answering in EL. In Proceedings of DL Workshop’07. 1--8.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  74. R. Rosati and A. Almatelli. 2010. Improving query answering over DL-Lite ontologies. In Proceedings of KR’10. AAAI Press, 290--300. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  75. Sebastian Rudolph, Markus Krötzsch, and Pascal Hitzler. 2008. All Elephants are bigger than all mice. In Proceedings of DL Workshop’08, Vol. 353. CEUR-WS.org, 1--11.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  76. Evren Sirin, Bijan Parsia, Bernardo Cuenca Grau, Aditya Kalyanpur, and Yarden Katz. 2007. Pellet: A practical OWL-DL reasoner. Journal of Web Semantics 5, 2 (2007), 51--53. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  77. Despoina Trivela, Giorgos Stoilos, Alexandros Chortaras, and Giorgos Stamou. 2015. Optimising resolution-based rewriting algorithms for OWL ontologies. Journal of Web Semantics 33 (2015), 30--49.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  78. Dmitry Tsarkov and Ian Horrocks. 2006. FaCT++ description logic reasoner: System description. In Proceedings of IJCAR’06, Vol. 4130. Springer, 292--297. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  79. Jacopo Urbani, Markus Krötzsch, Ceriel J. H. Jacobs, Irina Dragoste, and David Carral. 2018. Efficient model construction for horn logic with VLog—system description. In Proceedings of IJCAR’18, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Didier Galmiche, Stephan Schulz, and Roberto Sebastiani (Eds.), Vol. 10900. Springer, Berlin, 680--688.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  80. Yujiao Zhou, Bernardo Cuenca Grau, Yavor Nenov, Mark Kaminski, and Ian Horrocks. 2015. PAGOdA: Pay-as-you-go ontology query answering using a Datalog reasoner. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 54 (2015), 309--367. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Fast Query Answering over Existential Rules

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        • Published in

          cover image ACM Transactions on Computational Logic
          ACM Transactions on Computational Logic  Volume 20, Issue 2
          April 2019
          220 pages
          ISSN:1529-3785
          EISSN:1557-945X
          DOI:10.1145/3313982
          • Editor:
          • Orna Kupferman
          Issue’s Table of Contents

          Copyright © 2019 ACM

          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]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 27 March 2019
          • Accepted: 1 December 2018
          • Revised: 1 October 2018
          • Received: 1 August 2017
          Published in tocl Volume 20, Issue 2

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
          • Research
          • Refereed

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader

        HTML Format

        View this article in HTML Format .

        View HTML Format