Paper detail

Logical Foundations of RDF(S) with Datatypes

The Resource Description Framework (RDF) is a Semantic Web standard that provides a data language, simply called RDF, as well as a lightweight ontology language, called RDF Schema. We investigate embeddings of RDF in logic and show how standard logic programming and description logic technology can be used for reasoning with RDF. We subsequently consider extensions of RDF with datatype support, considering D entailment, defined in the RDF semantics specification, and D* entailment, a semantic weakening of D entailment, introduced by ter Horst. We use the embeddings and properties of the logics to establish novel upper bounds for the complexity of deciding entailment. We subsequently establish two novel lower bounds, establishing that RDFS entailment is PTime-complete and that simple-D entailment is coNP-hard, when considering arbitrary datatypes, both in the size of the entailing graph. The results indicate that RDFS may not be as lightweight as one may expect.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.