1 / 19

Temporal Reasoning for Supporting Temporal Queries in OWL 2.0

Temporal Reasoning for Supporting Temporal Queries in OWL 2.0. Sotiris Batsakis, Kostas Stravoskoufos Euripides G.M. Petrakis Technical University Of Crete Intelligent Systems Laboratory. Problem Definition. Representing evolution of information in time using OWL

dior
Download Presentation

Temporal Reasoning for Supporting Temporal Queries in OWL 2.0

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Temporal Reasoning for Supporting Temporal Queries in OWL 2.0 Sotiris Batsakis, Kostas Stravoskoufos Euripides G.M. Petrakis Technical University Of Crete Intelligent Systems Laboratory

  2. Problem Definition • Representing evolution of information in time using OWL • Temporal relations involve at least three arguments • OWL represents binary relations • Existing approaches: Temporal RDF, Named Graphs, Reification, Versioning, N-ary, 4D-fluents • No qualitative information • Limited OWL reasoning support • Querying of temporal information is also a problem • We propose a solution to all these problems based on 4D-fluents and N-ary relations. Techical University Of Crete Intelligent Systems Laboratory

  3. 4D Fluents[Welty & Fikes 2006] Classes TimeSlice, TimeInterval are introduced Dynamic objects become instances of TimeSlice Temporal properties of dynamic classes become instances of TimeInterval A time slice object is created each time a (fluent) property changes

  4. 4-D fluents example TechicalUniversityOfCreteIntelligentSystemsLaboratory

  5. N-ary approach [Noy & Rector 2006] • Dynamic Properties are attached to reified objects representing events • Dynamic properties are represented as properties and not as objects of properties as in reification • Event objects • Attached to specific static objects • Connect to Time Intervals

  6. N-ary and Reification example TechicalUniversityOfCreteIntelligentSystemsLaboratory

  7. 4-D fluents/N-ary: Comments • Advantages • Changes affect only related dynamic objects, not the entire ontology • Reasoning mechanisms and semantics of OWL fully supported • OWL 2.0 compatible • Disadvantages • Proliferation of objects Techical University Of Crete Intelligent Systems Laboratory

  8. Extending 4-D fluents/N-ary • Information: Points, intervals • Quantitative and Qualitative information • Qualitative Allen Relations (e.g., Before, After) are supported • Qualitative relations connect temporal intervals • Intervals with unknown endpoints • Interval relations are translated into point relations (Before, After, Equals) Techical University Of Crete Intelligent Systems Laboratory

  9. Allen Temporal Relations Techical University Of Crete Intelligent Systems Laboratory

  10. Reasoning • Infer new relations from existing ones • Before(x,y) AND Before(y,z) Before(x,z) • Problem 1: Reasoning over a mix of qualitative and quantitative information is a problem • Extract qualitative relations from quantitative ones • Reasoning over qualitative information • Problem 2:Assertions may be inconsistent or new assertions may take exponential time to compute • Solution: Restrict to tractable sets decided by polynomial algorithms such as Path Consistency [van Beek & Cohen 1990]

  11. Temporal Reasoning(1/2) • Path Consistency suggestscomposing and intersecting relations until: • A fixed point is reached (no additional inferences can be made) • An empty relation is yielded implying inconsistent assertions • Path Consistency is tractable, sound and complete for specific sets of temporal relations Techical University Of Crete Intelligent Systems Laboratory

  12. Temporal Reasoning (2/2) • Compositions and intersections of relations are defined and implemented in SWRL: • Before(x,y) AND Equals(y,z) Before(x,z) • (Before(x,y) OR Equals(x,y)) AND (After(x,y) OR Equals(x,y))Equals(x,y) Techical University Of Crete Intelligent Systems Laboratory

  13. SOWL Query Language • SPARQL-like query language supporting temporal operators SELECT ?x,?y… Where {?xproperty ?y… At(date)…} • Additional operators are introduced to SPARQL • AT, ALWAYS_AT, SOMETIMES_AT • Allen operators

  14. Temporal Operators • AT specifies time instants for which fluent properties hold true • ALWAYS_AT, SOMETIMES_AT: Return intervals that fluent always or sometime holds. • Allen’s operators: BEFORE, AFTER, MEETS, METBY, OVERLAPS, OVERLAPPEDBY, DURING, CONTAINS, STARTS, STARTEDBY,ENDS, ENDEDBYandEQUALS Techical University Of Crete Intelligent Systems Laboratory

  15. AT Temporal Operator Example SELECT?x,?y WHERE {?x has-employee ?y AT“3-5-2007” } Techical University Of Crete Intelligent Systems Laboratory

  16. Allen Operator Example SELECT?x,?y WHERE {?x has-employee ?y BEFORE company1 has-employee ?y } Techical University Of Crete Intelligent Systems Laboratory

  17. Conclusion • We extended 4D-fluents and N-ary relations for representing evolution of qualitative (in adition to quantitative) temporal information in OWL ontologies • Offers temporal reasoning support over qualitative and quantitative relations • Querying support by extending SPARQL with additional temporal operators Techical University Of Crete Intelligent Systems Laboratory

  18. Future Work • Extending representation-query language for spatial information [Batsakis & Petrakis, RuleML 2011] • Optimizations for large scale applications Techical University Of Crete Intelligent Systems Laboratory

  19. Thank you Questions ?

More Related