skip to main content
10.1145/2452376.2452441acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesedbtConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Optimizing query rewriting in ontology-based data access

Published:18 March 2013Publication History

ABSTRACT

In ontology-based data access (OBDA), an ontology is connected to autonomous, and generally pre-existing, data repositories through mappings, so as to provide a high-level, conceptual view over such data. User queries are posed over the ontology, and answers are computed by reasoning both on the ontology and the mappings. Query answering in OBDA systems is typically performed through a query rewriting approach which is divided into two steps: (i) the query is rewritten with respect to the ontology (ontology rewriting of the query); (ii) the query thus obtained is then reformulated over the database schema using the mapping assertions (mapping rewriting of the query). In this paper we present a new approach to the optimization of query rewriting in OBDA. The key ideas of our approach are the usage of inclusion between mapping views and the usage of perfect mappings, which allow us to drastically lower the combinatorial explosion due to mapping rewriting. These ideas are formalized in PerfectMap, an algorithm for OBDA query rewriting. We have experimented PerfectMap in a real-world OBDA scenario: our experimental results clearly show that, in such a scenario, the optimizations of PerfectMap are crucial to effectively perform query answering.

References

  1. P. A. Bernstein and L. Haas. Information integration in the enterprise. Comm. of the ACM, 51(9):72--79, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. A. Calì, G. Gottlob, and A. Pieris. New expressive languages for ontological query answering. In Proc. of AAAI 2011, pages 1541--1546, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. A. Calì, D. Lembo, and R. Rosati. Query rewriting and answering under constraints in data integration systems. In Proc. of IJCAI 2003, pages 16--21, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. D. Calvanese, G. De Giacomo, D. Lembo, M. Lenzerini, A. Poggi, M. Rodriguez-Muro, R. Rosati, M. Ruzzi, and D. F. Savo. The Mastro system for ontology-based data access. Semantic Web J., 2(1):43--53, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. D. Calvanese, G. De Giacomo, D. Lembo, M. Lenzerini, and R. Rosati. Tractable reasoning and efficient query answering in description logics: The DL-Lite family. J. of Automated Reasoning, 39(3):385--429, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. D. Calvanese, G. De Giacomo, D. Lembo, M. Lenzerini, and R. Rosati. Conceptual modeling for data integration. In A. T. Borgida, V. Chaudhri, P. Giorgini, and E. Yu, editors, Conceptual Modeling: Foundations and Applications -- Essays in Honor of John Mylopoulos, volume 5600 of LNCS, pages 173--197. Springer, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. D. Calvanese, G. De Giacomo, D. Lembo, M. Lenzerini, and R. Rosati. Data complexity of query answering in description logics. Artificial Intelligence, 2012. To appear. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. O. M. Duschka, M. R. Genesereth, and A. Y. Levy. Recursive query plans for data integration. J. of Logic Programming, 43(1):49--73, 2000.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. G. Gottlob, G. Orsi, and A. Pieris. Ontological queries: Rewriting and optimization. In Proc. of ICDE 2011, pages 2--13, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. A. Y. Halevy. Answering queries using views: A survey. VLDB Journal, 10(4):270--294, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. A. Y. Halevy, A. Rajaraman, and J. Ordille. Data integration: The teenage years. In Proc. of VLDB 2006, pages 9--16, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. G. Konstantinidis and J. L. Ambite. Scalable query rewriting: a graph-based approach. In Proc. of ACM SIGMOD, pages 97--108, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. R. Kontchakov, C. Lutz, D. Toman, F. Wolter, and M. Zakharyaschev. The combined approach to query answering in DL-Lite. In Proc. of KR 2010, pages 247--257, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. W. Le, S. Duan, A. Kementsietsidis, F. Li, and M. Wang. Rewriting queries on SPARQL views. In Proc. of WWW 2011, pages 655--664, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. M. Lenzerini. Data integration: A theoretical perspective. In Proc. of PODS 2002, pages 233--246, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. M. Lenzerini. Ontology-based data management. In Proc. of CIKM 2011, pages 5--6, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. A. Y. Levy, A. O. Mendelzon, Y. Sagiv, and D. Srivastava. Answering queries using views. In Proc. of PODS'95, pages 95--104, 1995. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. H. Pérez-Urbina, B. Motik, and I. Horrocks. Tractable query answering and rewriting under description logic constraints. J. of Applied Logic, 8(2):186--209, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. A. Poggi, D. Lembo, D. Calvanese, G. De Giacomo, M. Lenzerini, and R. Rosati. Linking data to ontologies. J. on Data Semantics, X:133--173, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. R. Pottinger and A. Y. Halevy. MiniCon: A scalable algorithm for answering queries using views. VLDB Journal, 10(2--3):182--198, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. A. Riazanov and A. Voronkov. The design and implementation of VAMPIRE. AI Communications, 15(2--3):91--110, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. M. Rodríguez-Muro and D. Calvanese. Dependencies: Making ontology based data access work in practice. In Proc. of AMW 2011, volume 749 of CEUR, ceur-ws.org, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. M. Rodriguez-Muro and D. Calvanese. High performance query answering over DL-Lite ontologies. In Proc. of KR 2012, pages 308--318, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. R. Rosati and A. Almatelli. Improving query answering over DL-Lite ontologies. In Proc. of KR 2010, pages 290--300, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. J. D. Ullman. Information integration using logical views. Theoretical Computer Science, 239(2):189--210, 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Optimizing query rewriting in ontology-based data access

          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
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Other conferences
            EDBT '13: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Extending Database Technology
            March 2013
            793 pages
            ISBN:9781450315975
            DOI:10.1145/2452376

            Copyright © 2013 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: 18 March 2013

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article

            Acceptance Rates

            Overall Acceptance Rate7of10submissions,70%

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader