Paper detail

RORS: Enhanced Rule-based OWL Reasoning on Spark

The rule-based OWL reasoning is to compute the deductive closure of an ontology by applying RDF/RDFS and OWL entailment rules. The performance of the rule-based OWL reasoning is often sensitive to the rule execution order. In this paper, we present an approach to enhancing the performance of the rule-based OWL reasoning on Spark based on a locally optimal executable strategy. Firstly, we divide all rules (27 in total) into four main classes, namely, SPO rules (5 rules), type rules (7 rules), sameAs rules (7 rules), and schema rules (8 rules) since, as we investigated, those triples corresponding to the first three classes of rules are overwhelming (e.g., over 99% in the LUBM dataset) in our practical world. Secondly, based on the interdependence among those entailment rules in each class, we pick out an optimal rule executable order of each class and then combine them into a new rule execution order of all rules. Finally, we implement the new rule execution order on Spark in a prototype called RORS. The experimental results show that the running time of RORS is improved by about 30% as compared to Kim & Park's algorithm (2015) using the LUBM200 (27.6 million triples).

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors1 topic

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.