Query Answering Based on the Modal Correspondence Theory
description
Transcript of Query Answering Based on the Modal Correspondence Theory
Query Answering Based on the Modal Correspondence Theory
Evgeny ZolinUniversity of Manchester
Manchester, [email protected]
2/17
Talk Outline
• Description Logics, knowledge bases
• Answering conjunctive queries
• Modal correspondence theory
• “From modal logic to query answering”
• Applications:• Transferring Kracht’s Theorem• Beyond Kracht’s fragment• Adding inverse relations
• “From query answering back to modal logic”?
• Conclusions and outlook
3/17
Description Logics• A family of knowledge representation formalisms
• Vocabulary:
– concept names A, B, …;
– role names R, S, …
– individual names a, b, …
• Syntax for the Description Logic ALC :
– concepts are built up from concept names (A, B, …) using operations C, C D, C D, and R.C, R.C
• [K.Schild,1991] ALC is a notational variant of the multi-
modal logic K(m): replace Ri and Ri with ◊i and □i
4/17
Description Logics (continued)• A knowledge base KB = T , A consists of:
– T : TBox (“terminology”) contains axioms: C D
– A : ABox (“world description”) assertions: a:C, aRb
• Extensions (indicated by adding letters to logic’s name):
• Reasoning problems:
– KB satisfiability: whether there is a model of a given KB
– instance checking and instance retrieval: KB a :C
I – inverse roles: R –
O – nominals: { a }
Q – num.restr.: ( ≥n R.C )
H – role hierarchy: R S
S – transitive roles: Trans(R)
5/17
Query answering• A conjunctive query q(x) is an expression of the form:
q(x) (y) term1(x, y) … termk(x, y) where x,y are lists of variables, terms are either z :C or zRz’ (z,z’{x,y})
• The answer set of the query q(x) w.r.t. a KB:
ans(q,KB) := { a IndNames: KB q(a) }
• No tight complexity bounds for query answering known so far
– SHIQ is ExpTime-complete [S.Tobies,2001]. Query answering:
• 3coNExpTime upper bound, if KB has no transitive roles;
• 4coNExpTime in general case [Calvanese et al., DL2005].
– SHOIQ is NExpTime-complete, but the decidability of the query answering problem has only recently been established
6/17
A closer look at instance retrieval• Consider KB a : C, where the concept C contains fresh
concept names (X, …) not occurring in the KB.
• The concept X R.X “answers” the query q(x) xRx
• The concept R.X S.X “answers” the query
q(x) y ( xRy xSy )
all individuals will be retrieved
no individuals will be retrieved
{ a | KB aRa }
{ a | KB y (aRy aSy) }
KB a : X
KB a : (X X )
KB a : (X R.X )
KB a : (R.X S.X )
7/17
Query answered by a conceptDefinition. A query q(x) is answered by a concept C if,
for any KB and a constant a, KB q(a) KB a :C
• The concept X R.X answers the query q(x) xRx
R.X S.X answers the query q(x) y(xRy xSy)
From modal logic:From modal logic: F ||– p ◊p R is reflexive: x xRx
F,e ||– p ◊p R is reflexive at e: eRe
F,e ||– □R p ◊S p y (eRy eSy) holds in F
8/17
Modal correspondence theory
• Modal logic K(m): := pi | | | □i
• (Kripke) semantics:
– Frame: F = W, R1, …, Rm , where Ri W 2
– Model: M = F,v, where a valuation v(pi) W
• A formula is true at a point e of a model M: M,e
• Local validity: F,e ||– iff M,e for any M = F,v
Let (x) be a FO-formula over binary predicates {R1, …, Rm }.
Definition. (x) locally corresponds to if, for any frame F and its point e, F,e ||– F (e).
9/17
“From modal logic to query answering”
Given , denote by C the corresponding ALC-concept
(with variables pi replaced by fresh concept names Xi ).
Theorem (Reduction) Suppose that
• q(x) is a relational query (with one free variable);
is a modal formula.
Then:
if q(x) locally corresponds to
then q(x) is answered by the
ALC-concept C
(over any KB)?
10/17
Sahlqvist’s and Kracht’s theorems Modal formulas <~~~> First-order formulas
[Sahlqvist,1975] {… …} <~~~> {… (x) …} [Kracht,1993]
Family of queries K : For any query of the following shape, there exists a concept that answers it. For a relational query q(x), the resulting concept is in ALC.
q(x) y (Tree(x,y)
i,j x Ri yj x Rt x
k,l yk Rl x
x : C s ys: Ds )
x
11/17
Queries within Kracht’s fragmentxRx X R.X
y(xRy ySx) X R.S.X
y(xRy ySx y:C ) X R.(C S.X)
y(xRy xSy) R.Y S.Y
y(xRy xSy y:C ) R.Y S.(C Y )y(xR1y1 y1R2y2 y1R3y3 y1R2y2 y4R5y5
y4R6y6 xS1y1 xS4y6 y2S2x y5S3x )
( S1.Y11 S4.Y46 X22 X53 )
R1. ( Y11 R2.S2.X22 R3.T
R4. ( R6.Y46 R5.S3.X53 ))
x R
xR
yS C
xR
yS C
x
12/17
Beyond Kracht’s fragment
Parallel-serial queries (with two poles)Parallel-serial queries (with two poles)x y
x y x yq1(x)
q2(x)
serial connection (q1 o q2)
x y
x y
parallel connection (q1 || q2)
q(x) y ( xRy )
Fact: Any parallel-serial relational query q(x) is answered by some concept in ALC (,o):
R(q):=R for atomic q(x)
R(q1 || q2):=R(q1)
R(q2)
R(q1 o q2):=R(q1) o
R(q2)
Then q(x) is answered by the concept R(q).T
13/17
Beyond Kracht’s fragment (continued)Family of queries Z : For any query of the following
shape, there exists a concept answering it. If q(x) is relational, then the concept belongs to ALC.
yx
yx
Reversed tree with the root y, whose all leaves merged in x
A parallel-serial query, where only atomic q2 are allowed in (q1 o q2)
14/17
Adding role inverses
Theorem (Family of queries Y )
• For any connected query q(x) without cycles consisting of bound variables only, there is a concept answering it (and it can be built in linear time).
• If q(x) is relational, then the resulting concept belongs to the Description Logic ALCI.
• (K Z ) Y
x
15/17
From query answering back to modal logic?Theorem (Reduction)
q(x) loc. corresponds to q(x) is answered by C
Lemma If q(x) is answered by a concept C , then for
any frame F and its point e, F q(e) F,e ||– .
Recently: we can replace “” with “” in the above Lemma for finitely branching frames F.
Definition A frame F is finitely branching if, for any its point e and a relation R, the set { d | eRd } is finite.
16/17
From query answering back to modal logic?• Validity of a modal formula ≈ closed world assumption
Ex.: F = W,R , where W = {a,b,c,d},
R = { a,b, a,c, c,d }.
F, b ||– ◊T (b has no R-successors)
F, c ||– ◊p □p (R is functional at the point c)
• Entailment from a KB ≈ open world assumption
KB=T, A , TBox T is empty, Abox A = { aRb, aRc, cRd }
Then neither KB b:R.T, nor KB c : ( R.X R.X )
a
c
b
d
17/17
Conclusions and outlookRelationship between corr. theory and query answering
Two families of queries answered by ALC-concepts
A larger family of queries answered by ALCI-concepts
• Questions and further directions:
– Does the converse “” of the Reduction Theorem hold?
– Characterisation of conj. queries answered by concepts?
– More expressive queries? (disjunction, equality)
– Adding number restrictions? ( ALCQ ≈ Graded ML)
– Relations of arbitrary arities? ( DLR ≈ Polyadic ML)
Thank you!