1 / 24

A Visual Approach to Semantic Query Design Using a Web-Based Graphical Query Designer

A Visual Approach to Semantic Query Design Using a Web-Based Graphical Query Designer. Paul R. Smart, Alistair Russell, Dave Braines , Yannis Kalfoglou , , Jie Bao and Nigel R. Shadbolt Presented by Kristine Monteith CS 652 – Information Extraction and Integration 5/21/09. Overview.

kerry-daniel
Download Presentation

A Visual Approach to Semantic Query Design Using a Web-Based Graphical Query Designer

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. A Visual Approach to Semantic Query Design Using a Web-Based Graphical Query Designer Paul R. Smart, Alistair Russell, Dave Braines, YannisKalfoglou, , JieBaoand Nigel R. Shadbolt Presented by Kristine Monteith CS 652 – Information Extraction and Integration 5/21/09

  2. Overview • Semantic Query Languages such as SPARQL are important tools for Information Retrieval • This paper presents a tool to aid in the process of query formation • Visual Query Systems • Syntactically valid queries • Avoid lexical and syntactic errors • Possibility of improved efficiency, understanding, and reduced training requirements

  3. vSPARQL Visual Query Language • Set of graphic notations that support the visual representation of SPARQL query components • Outline • Core SPARQL Features • Triple Patterns • Simple Select Query • Graph Patterns • Solution Sequence Ordering • SPARQL CONSTRUCT Queries • Other SPARQL Features

  4. Core SPARQL Features

  5. Triple Patterns

  6. Simple Select Query PREFIX rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> PREFIX edto: <http://www.e-defence.org/ontologies/terrorism.owl#> SELECT ?activity ?date WHERE { ?activity rdf:typeedto:Activity. ?activity edto:hasDate ?date }

  7. Simple Select Query

  8. Graph Patterns • Each variable has local scope with respect to the graph pattern in which it is contained PREFIX rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> PREFIX edto: <http://www.e-defence.org/ontologies/terrorism.owl#> SELECT ?activity WHERE { {?activity rdf:typeedto:MilitaryActivity}. {?activity rdf:ytpeedto:BiologicalActivity} }

  9. Graph Patterns

  10. Other Graph Patterns • Optional graph patterns • Union graph patterns • Allow users to specify alternatives for graph pattern matching

  11. Solution Sequence Ordering • Specify the order in which query results are returned

  12. Filtering PREFIX rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> PREFIX edto: <http://www.e-defence.org/ontologies/terrorism.owl#> SELECT ?activity ?activityDate WHERE { ?activity rdf:typeedto:Activity ?activity edto:hasDate ?activityDate FILTER (?activity>"2005-01-01T00:00:00Z"^^xsd:dateTime) }

  13. Filtering

  14. SPARQL CONSTRUCT Queries • Define both a set of triples to match against the rdf graph and a template for rdf construction CONSTRUCT { _:a rdf:typeedto:TerroristAttack. _:a edto:hasICN ?aaip_ICN. ?x owl:sameAs _:a } WHERE { ?x rdf:typeaaip:TerroristIncident ?x aaip:hasICN ?aaip_ICN ?y rdf:typeedto:TerroristAttack ?y edto:hasICN ?edto_ICN }

  15. SPARQL CONSTRUCT Queries

  16. Other SPARQL Features • Supported in the NITELIGHT tool • Not part of the vSPARQLspecification • ASK and DESCRIBE query forms • DISTINCT, LIMIT and OFFSET solution modifiers

  17. NITELIGHT Tool

  18. Additional Application Areas • Rule Creation • Take advantage of multiple knowledge bases • Information Integration and Interoperability • Ontology alignments between ostensibly disparate ontologies

  19. Rule Creation CONSTRUCT { ?z edto:hasSuspectedResponsibilityFor ?x } WHERE { ?x rdf:typeedto:TerroristAttack . ?x edto:isPerformedBy ?y . ?y edto:isMemberOf ?z . ?z rdf:typeedto:TerroristOrganization }

  20. Information Integration and Interoperability PREFIX edto: <http://www.e-defence.org/ontologies/terrorism.owl#> PREFIX ito: <http://www.ito.org/terrorism.owl#> PREFIX rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> PREFIX rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> PREFIX owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> PREFIX xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> CONSTRUCT { _:t rdf:typeedto:TerroristAttack . _:t edto:isSuicideAttackxsd:true . _:d ref:typeedto:ExplosiveDevice . _:t edto:usesedto _:d } WHERE { ?x rdf:typeito:TerroristIncident . ?x ito:hasTypeito:Bombing . ?x ito:involvesWeaponito:Explosive . ?x ito:hasVictim ?victim . ?victim ito:isFatalityxsd:true . ?victim rdf:typeito:Terrorist . ?x ito:perpetratedBy ?victim }

  21. Strengths • Helped me understand SPARQL better • Enforces correct syntax • Seems like an attractive, easy-to-use program

  22. Weakness • Requires the user to already be familiar with SPARQL • Tool not available online • Ontology not available online

  23. Future Work • User evaluation study already planned

  24. QUESTIONS?

More Related