an ontology-extended relational algebra piero bonatti università di napoli "federico ii"...
Post on 20-Dec-2015
218 views
TRANSCRIPT
An Ontology-Extended Relational Algebra
Piero BonattiUniversità di Napoli "Federico II"
Yu DengV.S. Subrahmanian
University of Maryland College Park
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 2
Outline Problem statement Approach Motivating example Ontology-extended relational algebra HOME system Contributions Related work Future work
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 3
Problem Statement Integrating heterogeneous data sources is
an important problem. There are many projects in this area, but at syntactic level.
Our goal: Integrate data sources with diverse structures
and assumptions at the semantic level. Answer queries correctly under user’s
assumptions of semantic meaning about the terms being used.
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 4
Approach Associate ontologies to data
sources. Ontology interoperation. Extend relational data model
and relational algebra.
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 5
Motivating Example Two parts relations:
Relation Parts1 with the schema (Name, Cost, Shipping)
Relation Parts2 with the schema (Item, Price, ShipCost)
Two insurance claim relations: Relation Claims1 with the schema (ClaimId,
Type, Cost) Relation Claims2 with the schema
(ClaimNumber, Type, Value)
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra
Parts1 and Parts2 Relations
Name Cost Shipping
Tire 54.19 20.05
Gasket 3.05 1.55
Valve 3.35 1.55
Brake pads
78.50 8.50
Evaporator
305.00
11.50
Item Price ShipCost
Wheel 50.05 18.00
Air Gasket
3.00 1.70
Valve 3.35 1.55
Hubcap 11.50 6.00
Spark Plug
20.00 8.50
Parts1 relation Parts2 relation
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 7
Problems (1) When users specify a query spanning these
two relations, they may wonder: Do the fields Cost and Price mean the same thing? Is wheel a part of tire? Is air gasket a gasket?
Furthermore, does the field Cost use the unit US dollar? Does the field Price use the unit Euro?
Users may be at a loss to determine these by looking at the fields.
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra
Claims1 and Claims2 Relation
ClaimId Type Cost
1 burglary 2000
2 theft 150
3 mugging 860
4 arson 1800
ClaimNumber
Type Value
1 robbery 400
2 fire 550
3 auto accident
500
4 burglary
250
Claims1 relation Claims2 relation
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 9
Problem (2) Users may have a query such as “Find
all the thefts that involved a cost of over $1000 dollars”. The system should automatically recognize that burglaries, muggings and robberies count as thefts.
In addition, conversions between units are needed if costs are represented in different units in above query.
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 10
Ontology Extended Relation (OER)
We use ontology to convey semantics about terms in a domain and associate ontologies with relations.
Intuitively, an Ontology extended relation is an ordinary relation as well as an associated ontology.
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 11
Ontology Suppose ∑ is some finite set of strings
and S is some set. An ontology w.r.t. ∑ is a partial mapping Θ from ∑ to hierarchies for S.
For example, ∑ = {isa, part_of, affects} A hierarchy can be regarded as a Hasse
diagram associated with a partial ordering. We provide formal definition in our paper.
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 12
Ontology Example
theft
mugging
arson
burglary
Ontology associated with Claims1 relation (∑ = {isa})
Wheel
Valve
Air Gasket
Hubcap
Spark Plug
Ontology associated with Parts2 relation (∑ = {part_of})
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 13
Ontology Integration Example query: Find all the thefts that
involved a cost of over $1000 dollars. Ontology integration is needed to answer
this query when performing binary operations between two ontology extended relations.
Interoperation constraints are needed to specify the connections between ontologies. We consider: x = y, x ≤ y, x ≠ y, x !≤ y, suppose x and y are from two different hierarchies.
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 14
Definition of Hierarchy Integration
Suppose (Hi, ≤i), 1≤i ≤n are n different hierarchies and suppose IC is a finite set of interoperation constraints. A hierarchy (H, ≤) is said to be an integration of (Hi, ≤i), 1≤i ≤n iff there are n injective mappings φ1,…,φn from H1,…,Hn respectively to H such that:
(i {1,…,n})x ≤i y φi(x) ≤ φi(y).
(x Hi)(y Hj) (x:i op y:j) IC φi(x) op φj(y).
H1
H2
Hn
.
.
.
H
φ1
φ2
φn
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra
Example of Hierarchy Integration
theft
mugging
arson
burglary
isa hierarchy with Claims1 relation
robbery fireauto-accident
burglary
isa hierarchy with Claims2 relation
theft
mugging arsonburglary
fire auto-accident
Integrated isa hierarchy for Claims1 and Claims2
IC = {theft:1 = robbery:2, arson:1 ≤ fire:2}
With the integrated hierarchy, system can recognize that burglaries, muggings and robberies count as thefts.
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 16
Canonical Hierarchy Suppose (Hi, ≤i), 1≤i ≤n are n different
hierarchies and suppose IC is a finite set of interoperation constraints. The canonical hierarchy (H*, ≤*) of (Hi, ≤i), 1≤i ≤n is defined as follows. H* is the set of all strongly connected components
of the graph associated with (Hi, ≤i), 1≤i ≤n. If x*, y* H*, then x* ≤ * y* iff either x* = y* or there
exists a directed path from x:i to y:j (for some x:i x* and y:j y* ) in the hierarchy graph associated with (Hi, ≤i), 1≤i ≤n.
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 17
Example of Canonical Hierarchy
theft
mugging
arson
burglary
isa hierarchy with Claims1 relation
robbery fireauto-accident
burglary
isa hierarchy with Claims2 relation
Canonical Hierarchy with Claims1 and Claims2
IC = {theft:1 = robbery:2, arson:1 ≤ fire:2}
theftrobbery
burglary mugging
fire
arson
auto-accident
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra
Theorems about Hierarchy Integrability
Let (Hi, ≤i), 1≤i ≤n be a family of hierarchies and suppose (H*, ≤*) is its canonical hierarchy. Suppose (H, ≤), φ1,…,φn is any arbitrary witness to the integration of (Hi, ≤i), 1≤i ≤n. Then: [x:i] ≤* [y:j] φi(x) ≤ φj(y).
A set (Hi, ≤i), 1≤i ≤n of hierarchies is integrable if and only if the canonical witness of (Hi, ≤i), 1≤i ≤n is a witness to the integrability of (Hi, ≤i), 1≤i ≤n.
This shows how to integrate hierarchies very efficiently: compute canonical hierarchy and check integrability.
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 19
Definition of Ontology Integrability
Suppose is some finite set of strings, S is some set, and 1,…,n are ontologies w.r.t. , S. Suppose IC is a finite set of interoperation constraints. The ontologies 1,…,n are integrable iff for every x , 1(x),…, n(x) are integrable.
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 20
Definition of OER An ontology extended relation is a
triple (R, S, Hisa), where S is a schema (A1:1, …,An:n), Hisa is an isa hierarchy and the following constraints are satisfied: 1,…,n Tisa
R belowHisa(1) x … x belowHisa
(n)
BelowH() = {’|’≤} dom()
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 21
Ontology Extended Relational Algebra (1)
Example query: Find the car parts from Parts1 relation which are more expensive than Wheel in Parts2 relation. Conversion function is needed to answer this query.
Conversion Function: for each pair of types i and j, we assume there exists at most one conversion function i2j : dom(i) dom(j)
Given a term X, Xt is defined as: t.Ai, if X = Ai, where t is a tuple of relation R. , if X = . v, if X = v:.
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 22
Ontology Extended Relational Algebra (2)
Operations in simple select conditions: X op Y, op { =, <>, <, , >, }: Let be the least
common supertype of X and Y, then (type(X)2)(Xt) op (type(Y)2)(Yt) is true.
X instance_of Y: Yt T, type(X) ≤H Yt, and Xt dom(Yt). X subtype_of Y: Xt T , Yt T, Xt ≤H Yt.
If c1, c2 are select conditions, c1 c2, c1 c2, and c1 are select conditions.
Complex operations in select conditions: X below Y: X instance_of Y X subtype_of Y. X above Y: Y below X.
The operators instance_of, subtype_of, below and above are applicable to arbitrary hierarchies.
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 23
Ontology Extended Relational Algebra (3)
Suppose (R1, S1, H1),…,(RZ, SZ, HZ) are ontology extended relations, F is a fusion of H1,…,HZ via witness trF.
If E is a relation Ri, [E]F = (R, S, F), where R = trF(Ri), S = (A1:trF(1), …, An: trF(n)).
If E is Ai1,…, Aik(E’) (1 ij n, 1 j k) and if [E’]F = (R’,
(A1:1, …, An:n), F), then [E]F = (R, S, F), where R = Ai1,
…, Aik(R’) and S = (Ai1
:i1, …, Aik
:ik).
If E is E1 x E2 and [Ei]F = (Ri, Si, F), (i = 1, 2), then [E]F = (R, S, F), where R = R1 x R2, S = S1S2.
If E is c(E’), [E’]F = (R’, S, F), then [E]F = (R, S, F), where R = {t R’ (R’, S, F), t |= c}.
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 24
Example of Selection Example query: Find all the items
from Parts1 relation which are parts of Tire.
To answer this query: Ontology of Parts1 including part_of
hierarchy. Retrieve the set of subtypes of Tire with
regard to part_of relationship. Transform the query based on the set of
subtypes.
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 25
Example of Join Example query: Find the items from
Claims2 relation which are a kind of theft and cost more than the item theft in Claims1 relation.
To answer this query: Integrated ontology of Claims1 and Claims2
including isa hierarchy. Conversion function between the
corresponding units. Transform the query with regard to the
ontology and conversion function.
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 26
Ontology Extended Relational Algebra (4)
If E = E1 op E2 where op {, , }, and [Ei]F = (Ri, Si, F), (i=1,2), and S1, S2 have a least common super schema S, then [E]F = (R, S, F), where R = S12S(R1) op S22S(R2).
If E = (S)E’, where S is a schema and [E’]F = (R, S’, F), then [E]F = (S’2S(R), S, F).
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 27
Example of Union Example query: Find all the items from
Claims1 and Claims2 that are a kind of theft and involve a cost of over $1000 dollars.
To answer this query: Integrated ontology including isa hierarchy which
contains not only values, but also field names, such as Cost and Value.
Conversion function between corresponding units. Compute least common super schema of Claims1
and Claims2. Convert the selected records to the least common
super schema and compute the union of them.
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 28
HOME We built the HOME (Heterogeneous
Ontology Management Engine) system to prove the proposed concepts and implement the algorithms.
The main components in HOME: GUI Ontology maker
Rule maker Ontology inference
Query Executor
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 29
Current Status of HOME HOME is implemented in Java. Briefly, HOME has the following major
functionalities: Learn ontology from relational and XML data sources. Modify ontology with a rule maker. Browse ontology with zoomable interface. Import ontology from XML files and write ontology
back to XML files. Ontology integration. Ontology extended query processing for relational
data sources and XML sources.
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra
Experimental Results (1)
Performance of HOME for conjunctive selection queries based on GNIS data sets
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra
Experimental Results (2)
Performance of HOME for join queries based on GNIS data sets
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra
Experimental Results (3)
Join queries with varying selectivity and number of tuples based on GNIS data sets
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra
Experimental Results (4)
Performance of ontology integration algorithms
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 34
Contributions Theory about ontologies and
ontology integration. Theory about ontology extended
relational algebra. HOME: a platform for ontology-
based data integration.
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 35
Related Work Integrate heterogeneous data sources:
TSIMMIS from Stanford HERMES from UMD SIMS from USC DISCO from INRIA and UMD
Ontology algebra Scalable Knowledge Composition Project from
Stanford Focused on computing union, intersection, and
difference of ontologies, instead of answering queries with ontologies.
Did not consider embedding ontologies into existing data models.
10/28/2003 Ontology Extended Algebra 36
Future Work Integrate non-relational data sources,
such as semi-structured sources, textual sources, etc.
More effort on Semantic Web, DAML+OIL, RDF, metadata, etc.
Extension to richer ontology structures. Indexing for ontology based data
retrieval. Scaling ontology integration.