skip to main content
10.1145/3357384.3358049acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescikmConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Leveraging Graph Neighborhoods for Efficient Inference

Published:03 November 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

Several probabilistic extensions of description logic languages have been proposed and thoroughly studied. However, their practical use has been hampered by intractability of various reasoning tasks. While present-day knowledge bases (KBs) contain millions of instances and thousands of axioms, most state-of-the-art reasoners are capable of handling small scale KBs with thousands of instances. Thus, recent research has focused on leveraging the structure of KBs and queries in order to speed up inference runtime. However, these efforts have not been satisfactory in providing reasoners that are suitable for practical use in large scale KBs. In this study, we aim to tackle this challenging problem. In doing so, we use a probabilistic extension of OWL RL (called PRORL) as a modeling language and exploit graph neighborhoods (of undirected graphical models) for efficient approximate probabilistic inference. We show that subgraph extraction based inference is much faster and has comparable accuracy to full graph inference. We perform several experiments, in order to support our claim, over a NELL KB containing millions of instances and thousands of axioms. Furthermore, we propose a novel graph-based algorithm to automatically partition inferences rules based on their structure for efficient parallel inference.

References

  1. Sören Auer, Christian Bizer, Georgi Kobilarov, Jens Lehmann, Richard Cyganiak, and Zachary Ives. 2007. Dbpedia: A nucleus for a web of open data. In The semantic web. Springer, 722--735.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Kurt Bollacker, Colin Evans, Praveen Paritosh, Tim Sturge, and Jamie Taylor. 2008. Freebase: a collaboratively created graph database for structuring human knowledge. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM SIGMOD international conference on Management of data. AcM, 1247--1250.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Rodrigo De Salvo Braz, Eyal Amir, and Dan Roth. 2005. Lifted first-order probabilistic inference. In IJCAI. Citeseer, 1319--1325.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Guy Broeck. 2011. On the completeness of first-order knowledge compilation for lifted probabilistic inference. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 1386--1394.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Andrew Carlson, Justin Betteridge, Bryan Kisiel, Burr Settles, Estevam R Hruschka Jr, and Tom M Mitchell. 2010. Toward an Architecture for Never-Ending Language Learning.. In AAAI. 306--1313.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Melisachew Wudage Chekol, Jakob Huber, Christian Meilicke, and Heiner Stuckenschmidt. 2016. Markov Logic Networks with Numerical Constraints. In ECAI 2016. 1017--1025.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Yang Chen and Daisy Zhe Wang. 2014. Knowledge expansion over probabilistic knowledge bases. In SIGMOD. ACM, 649--660.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Yang Chen, Daisy ZheWang, and Sean Goldberg. 2016. ScaLeKB: scalable learning and inference over large knowledge bases. The VLDB Journal 25, 6 (2016), 893-- 918.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Luc De Raedt, Anton Dries, Ingo Thon, Guy Van den Broeck, and Mathias Verbeke. 2015. Inducing probabilistic relational rules from probabilistic examples. In IJCAI. 1835--1842.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Xin Dong, Evgeniy Gabrilovich, Geremy Heitz, Wilko Horn, Ni Lao, Kevin Murphy, Thomas Strohmann, Shaohua Sun, and Wei Zhang. 2014. Knowledge Vault: A Web-Scale Approach to Probabilistic Knowledge Fusion. In SIGKDD. 601--610.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Laécio L. dos Santos, Rommel N. Carvalho, Marcelo Ladeira, Weigang Li, and Gilson Libório Mendes. 2015. PR-OWL2 RL - A Language for Scalable Uncertainty Reasoning on the Semantic Web information. In URSW co-located with ISWC, Bethlehem, USA, October 12, 2015. 14--25.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Anthony Fader, Stephen Soderland, and Oren Etzioni. 2011. Identifying Relations for Open Information Extraction. In Proceedings of the Conference of Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP '11). Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Luis Galárraga, Christina Teflioudi, Katja Hose, and Fabian M Suchanek. 2015. Fast Rule Mining in Ontological Knowledge Bases with AMIE+. The VLDB Journal 24, 6 (2015), 707--730.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Kiril Gashteovski, Rainer Gemulla, and Luciano Del Corro. 2017. MinIE: Minimizing Facts in Open Information Extraction. In EMNLP, Copenhagen, Denmark, September 9--11, 2017. 2630--2640.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Eric Gribkoff and Dan Suciu. 2016. SlimShot: In-Database Probabilistic Inference for Knowledge Bases. PVLDB 9, 7 (2016), 552--563.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Johannes Hoffart, Fabian M Suchanek, Klaus Berberich, Edwin Lewis-Kelham, Gerard De Melo, and Gerhard Weikum. 2011. YAGO2: exploring and querying world knowledge in time, space, context, and many languages. In Proceedings of the 20th international conference companion on World wide web. ACM, 229--232.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Jean Christoph Jung and Carsten Lutz. 2012. Ontology-based access to probabilistic data with OWL QL. In ISWC. Springer, 182--197.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Tushar Khot, Niranjan Balasubramanian, Eric Gribkoff, Ashish Sabharwal, Peter Clark, and Oren Etzioni. 2015. Markov logic networks for natural language question answering. arXiv preprint arXiv:1507.03045 (2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Angelika Kimmig, Bart Demoen, Luc De Raedt, Vitor Santos Costa, and Ricardo Rocha. 2011. On the implementation of the probabilistic logic programming language ProbLog. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 11, 2--3 (2011), 235--262.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Markus Krötzsch. 2012. OWL 2 Profiles: An Introduction to Lightweight Ontology Languages. In Proceedings of the 8th Reasoning Web Summer School, Vienna, Austria, September 3--8 2012 (LNCS), Thomas Eiter and Thomas Krennwallner (Eds.), Vol. 7487. Springer, 112--183.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Happy Mittal, Anuj Mahajan, Vibhav G Gogate, and Parag Singla. 2015. Lifted inference rules with constraints. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 3519--3527.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Mathias Niepert, Jan Noessner, and Heiner Stuckenschmidt. 2011. Log-linear description logics. In IJCAI. 2153--2158.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Feng Niu, Christopher Ré, AnHai Doan, and Jude Shavlik. 2011. Tuffy: Scaling up statistical inference in markov logic networks using an RDBMS. Proc. of the VLDB Endowment 4, 6 (2011), 373--384.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Jan Noessner, Mathias Niepert, and Heiner Stuckenschmidt. 2013. RockIt: Exploiting Parallelism and Symmetry for MAP Inference in Statistical Relational Models. In Twenty-Seventh AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. David Poole. 2003. First-order probabilistic inference. In IJCAI, Vol. 3. 985--991.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. MatthewRichardson and Pedro Domingos. 2006. Markov logic networks. Machine learning 62, 1--2 (2006), 107--136.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Stefan Schoenmackers, Oren Etzioni, Daniel SWeld, and Jesse Davis. 2010. Learning first-order horn clauses from web text. In EMNLP. 1088--1098.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Jaeho Shin, SenWu, FeiranWang, Christopher De Sa, Ce Zhang, and Christopher Ré. 2015. Incremental knowledge base construction using deepdive. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment 8, 11 (2015), 1310--1321.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Dan Suciu, Dan Olteanu, Christopher Ré, and Christoph Koch. 2011. Probabilistic databases. Synthesis Lectures on Data Management 3, 2 (2011), 1--180.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Denny Vrandecic and Markus Krötzsch. 2014. Wikidata: a free collaborative knowledgebase. Commun. ACM 57, 10 (2014), 78--85.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Ce Zhang and Christopher Ré. 2014. DimmWitted: A Study of Main-Memory Statistical Analytics. PVLDB 7, 12 (2014), 1283--1294.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Leveraging Graph Neighborhoods for Efficient Inference

        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 Conferences
          CIKM '19: Proceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management
          November 2019
          3373 pages
          ISBN:9781450369763
          DOI:10.1145/3357384

          Copyright © 2019 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: 3 November 2019

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          CIKM '19 Paper Acceptance Rate202of1,031submissions,20%Overall Acceptance Rate1,861of8,427submissions,22%

          Upcoming Conference

        • Article Metrics

          • Downloads (Last 12 months)7
          • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2

          Other Metrics

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader