No Arabic abstract
We give solutions to two fundamental computational problems in ontology-based data access with the W3C standard ontology language OWL 2 QL: the succinctness problem for first-order rewritings of ontology-mediated queries (OMQs), and the complexity problem for OMQ answering. We classify OMQs according to the shape of their conjunctive queries (treewidth, the number of leaves) and the existential depth of their ontologies. For each of these classes, we determine the combined complexity of OMQ answering, and whether all OMQs in the class have polynomial-size first-order, positive existential, and nonrecursive datalog rewritings. We obtain the succinctness results using hypergraph programs, a new computational model for Boolean functions, which makes it possible to connect the size of OMQ rewritings and circuit complexity.
We focus on ontology-mediated queries (OMQs) based on (frontier-)guarded existential rules and (unions of) conjunctive queries, and we investigate the problem of FO-rewritability, i.e., whether an OMQ can be rewritten as a first-order query. We adopt two different approaches. The first approach employs standard two-way alternating parity tree automata. Although it does not lead to a tight complexity bound, it provides a transparent solution based on widely known tools. The second approach relies on a sophisticated automata model, known as cost automata. This allows us to show that our problem is 2ExpTime-complete. In both approaches, we provide semantic characterizations of FO-rewritability that are of independent interest.
We show that, for OWL 2 QL ontology-mediated queries with (i) ontologies of bounded depth and conjunctive queries of bounded treewidth, (ii) ontologies of bounded depth and bounded-leaf tree-shaped conjunctive queries, and (iii) arbitrary ontologies and bounded-leaf tree-shaped conjunctive queries, one can construct and evaluate nonrecursive datalog rewritings by, respectively, LOGCFL, NL and LOGCFL algorithms, which matches the optimal combined complexity.
Our concern is the overhead of answering OWL 2 QL ontology-mediated queries (OMQs) in ontology-based data access compared to evaluating their underlying tree-shaped and bounded treewidth conjunctive queries (CQs). We show that OMQs with bounded-depth ontologies have nonrecursive datalog (NDL) rewritings that can be constructed and evaluated in LOGCFL for combined complexity, even in NL if their CQs are tree-shaped with a bounded number of leaves, and so incur no overhead in complexity-theoretic terms. For OMQs with arbitrary ontologies and bounded-leaf CQs, NDL-rewritings are constructed and evaluated in LOGCFL. We show experimentally feasibility and scalability of our rewritings compared to previously proposed NDL-rewritings. On the negative side, we prove that answering OMQs with tree-shaped CQs is not fixed-parameter tractable if the ontology depth or the number of leaves in the CQs is regarded as the parameter, and that answering OMQs with a fixed ontology (of infinite depth) is NP-complete for tree-shaped and LOGCFL for bounded-leaf CQs.
We provide an ultimately fine-grained analysis of the data complexity and rewritability of ontology-mediated queries (OMQs) based on an EL ontology and a conjunctive query (CQ). Our main results are that every such OMQ is in AC0, NL-complete, or PTime-complete and that containment in NL coincides with rewritability into linear Datalog (whereas containment in AC0 coincides with rewritability into first-order logic). We establish natural characterizations of the three cases in terms of bounded depth and (un)bounded pathwidth, and show that every of the associated meta problems such as deciding wether a given OMQ is rewritable into linear Datalog is ExpTime-complete. We also give a way to construct linear Datalog rewritings when they exist and prove that there is no constant Datalog rewritings.
Itemset mining is one of the most studied tasks in knowledge discovery. In this paper we analyze the computational complexity of three central itemset mining problems. We prove that mining confident rules with a given item in the head is NP-hard. We prove that mining high utility itemsets is NP-hard. We finally prove that mining maximal or closed itemsets is coNP-hard as soon as the users can specify constraints on the kind of itemsets they are interested in.