Adapted by Martin O’Connor
Stanford Medical Informatics, Stanford
University
Outline
Rules and the Semantic Web: OWL
+ SWRL
SWRLTab: a Protégé-OWL
development environment for
SWRL
Knowledge-driven Querying
Relation-to-OWL mapping
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 2
Semantic Web Stack
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 3
Limitations in OWL
The OWL reasoning tools are mostly related
to classes and classification.
OWL reasoning is able to compute all the
property values that are implied by the
property characteristic.
In OWL it is not possible to establish that a
person is the boss of a secretary, only that
the person is a boss.
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008
Rule-based Systems are common
in many domains
Engineering: Diagnosis rules
Commerce: Business rules
Law: Legal reasoning
Medicine: Eligibility, Compliance
Internet: Access authentication
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 5
Rule Markup (RuleML)
Initiative
Effort to standardize inference rules.
RuleML is a markup language for
publishing and sharing rule bases on
the World Wide Web.
Focus is on rule interoperation between
industry standards.
RuleML builds a hierarchy of rule
sublanguages upon XML, RDF, and OWL,
e.g., SWRL
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 6
What is SWRL?
SWRL is an acronym for Semantic
Web Rule Language.
SWRL is intended to be the rule
language of the Semantic Web.
SWRL includes a high-level abstract
syntax for Horn-like rules.
All rules are expressed in terms of
OWL concepts (classes, properties,
individuals).
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 7
SWRL: Combining Ontologies
and Rules
Semantic Web Rule Language (SWRL)
A proposal to combine ontologies
and rules:
Ontologies: OWL-DL
Rules: RuleML
SWRL = OWL-DL + RuleML
OWL-DL: variable free
corresponding to SHOIN(D)
RuleML: variables are used.
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008
Why Do We Need a Rule
Language?
A rule language is needed for
several reasons:
The existing rule sets can be reused.
Expressivity can be added to OWL
Although expressivity always comes
with a price, i.e.Decidabilit
It is easier to read and write rules
with a rule language.
Rules are called syntactic sugar;
True in some cases but not in all
situations
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008
SWRL Rule Format (1)
Head Body
(Consequent) (Antecedant)
SWRL rules have the form of an implication
between an antecedent (body) and
consequent (head).
The intended meaning can be read as:
whenever the conditions specified in the
antecedent hold, then the conditions
specified in the consequent must also hold.
Both the antecedent (body) and consequent
(head) consist of zero or more atoms.
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008
SWRL Rule Format (2)
An empty antecedent is treated as
trivially true (i.e. satisfied by every
interpretation), so the consequent must
also be satisfied by every interpretation;
An empty consequent is treated as
trivially false (i.e., not satisfied by any
interpretation), so the antecedent must
also not be satisfied by any
interpretation.
Multiple atoms are treated as a
conjunction
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008
SWRL Rules : Summary
Summarizing, SWRL rules can be
described as follows:
antecedent → consequent
in which the antecedent and
consequent consist of one or multiple
atoms.
Typical SWRL reasoning occurs on
property and instance levels.
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008
Example SWRL Rule: Has
uncle
hasParent(?x, ?y) ^ hasBrother(?y, ?z)
→ hasUncle(?x, ?z)
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 14
Example SWRL Rule with Named
Individuals: Has brother
Person(Fred) ^ hasSibling(Fred, ?s) ^ Man(?s) →
hasBrother(Fred, ?s)
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 15
Example SWRL Rule with Literals
and Built-ins: is adult?
Person(?p) ^ hasAge(?p,?age) ^
swrlb:greaterThan(?age,17)
→ Adult(?p)
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 16
SWRL Characteristics
W3C Submission in 2004:
http://www.w3.org/Submission/SWRL
Based on OWL-DL
Has a formal semantics
Rules saved as part of ontology
Increasing tool support: Bossam,
R2ML, Hoolet, Pellet, KAON2,
RacerPro, SWRLTab
Can work with reasoners
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 17
Combining OWL reasoning and
SWRL reasoning
OWL has inference capabilities through the
OWL characteristics of properties, like
inversion, symmetry and transitivity.
SWRL has inference capabilities through the
SWRL rules.
In order to avoid the necessity of iteration
between OWL inferences and SWRL
inferences, it would be good if rule engines
could also apply the OWL characteristics.
This implies that OWL characteristics would
be ‘translated’ to a SWRL equivalent.
In SWRL it is perfectly possible to define
rules for symmetry, inversion, or transitivity
characteristics.
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008
SWRLTab
A Protégé-OWL development
environment for working with
SWRL rules
Supports editing and execution of
rules
Extension mechanisms to work
with third-party rule engines
Mechanisms for users to define
built-in method libraries
Supports querying of ontologies
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 20
SWRLTab:
http://protege.cim3.net/cgi-
bin/wiki.pl?SWRLTab
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 21
What is the SWRL Editor?
The SWRL Editor is an extension to
Protégé-OWL that permits the
interactive editing of SWRL rules.
The editor can be used to create
SWRL rules, edit existing SWRL
rules, and read and write SWRL
rules.
It is accessible as a tab within
Protégé-OWL.
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 22
23
24
25
SWRL Java API
The SWRL API provides a mechanism to create
and manipulate SWRL rules in an OWL
knowledge base.
This API is used by the SWRL Editor. However,
it is accessible to all OWL Plugin developers.
Third party software can use this API to work
directly with SWRL rules and integrate rules
into their applications
Fully documented in SWRLTab Wiki.
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 26
Limitations of
SWRLTab/Protégé
SWRLTab is a very convenient tool
for editing SWRL rules since it
supports automatic completion of
the properties and class names and
checks the syntax of the entered
rules.
Rules are considered as instance
data in Protégé.
Protégé, even in the combination
with SWRLTab, does not support
SWRL rule execution.
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008
Need of a Rule Engine
Including SWRL Data in
Protege
CLASSES
APPLICATION
Ontology
SWRL
Knowledge
Base
INSTANCES RULES
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008
Need for Rule Engine
The execution of SWRL rules requires the
availability of a rule engine.
The most general picture of a rule engine :
The rule engine can perform reasoning using a set
of rules and a set of facts as input.
Any new facts that are inferred are used as input to
potentially fire more rules (in forward chaining).
Rules and facts should be available in a
format that is accessible to the rule engine.
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008
Rule Engine Execution
RULES
RULE ENGINE
FACTS
New
FACTS
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008
Provision of Rules to Rule
Engines
Translations that are necessary in the
current state-of-the-art to be able to run
SWRL rules on a Protégé data set.
The rules have to be translated and introduced
in the rule engine (1).
Afterwards, the ontology and the knowledge
base have to be translated and introduced into
the rule engine (2).
After reasoning (3),
the results of the reasoning should be
translated back into the Protégé format (4).
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008
Actions for Execution of SWRL
Rules based on Protégé Input
(3)
CLASSES
APPLICATION
RULES
Ontology
(1)
SWRL
RULE
Knowledge (2) ENGINE
FACTS
Base
INSTANCE (4) New
S RULES FACTS
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008
Reasoning Methods
the two reasoning methods are forward
chaining and backward chaining.
Forward Chaining
In forward chaining, the input and input changes
are used to select the rules that need to be fired,
and the inferred changes are treated as input
changes (so they can lead to the firing of rules,
too).
Backward Chaining
In backward chaining an assertion is put or a query
is set and the rule engine reasons back to the
conditions, implied by the assertion or the query,
that need to be applied to the data.
The rule engine returns an answer to the assertion
or to the query based on that data.
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008
SWRL JESS INTEGRATION
Executing SWRL Rules
SWRL is a language specification
Well-defined semantics
Developers must implement
engine
Or map to existing rule engines
Hence, a bridge…
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 36
SWRL Rule Engine
Bridge
GUI
OWL
KB SWRL Rule
Rule Engine
+ Engine Bridge
SWRL
Data
Knowledge
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008
SWRL Rule Engine Bridge
Given an OWL knowledge base it will extract SWRL
rules and relevant OWL knowledge.
Also provides an API to assert inferred knowledge.
Knowledge (and rules) are described in non Protégé-
OWL API-specific way.
These can then be mapped to a rule-engine specific
rule and knowledge format.
This mapping is developer’s responsibility.
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 38
Example: SWRL Bridge to
Integrate Jess Rule Engine with
Protégé-OWL
Jess is a Java-based rule engine.
Jess system consists of a rule
base, fact base, and an execution
engine.
Available free to academic users,
for a small fee to non-academic
users
Has been used in Protégé-based
tools, e.g., JessTab.
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 39
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008
42
43
44
46
Outstanding Issues
SWRL Bridge does not know about
all OWL constraints:
Contradictions with rules possible!
Consistency must be assured by the
user incrementally running a reasoner.
Hard problem to solve in general.
Integrated reasoner and rule engine
would be ideal.
Possible solution with KAON2.
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 47
SWRL Built-in Bridge
SWRL provides mechanisms to add user-defined
predicates, e.g.,
hasDOB(?x, ?y) ^ temporal:before(?y, ‘1997’)…
hasDOB(?x, ?y) ^ temporal:equals(?y, ‘2000’)…
These built-ins could be implemented by each rule engine.
However, the SWRL Bridge provides a dynamic loading
mechanism for Java-defined built-ins.
Can be used by any rule engine implementation.
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 49
Defining a Built-in in
Protégé-OWL
Describe library of built-ins in OWL
using definition of swrl:Builtin
provided by SWRL ontology.
Provide Java implementation of
built-ins and wrap in JAR file.
Load built-in definition ontology in
Protégé-OWL. Put JAR in plugins
directory.
Built-in bridge will make run-time
links.
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 50
Example: defining stringEqualIgnoreCase from
Core SWRL Built-ins Library
Core SWRL built-ins defined by:
http://www.w3.org/2003/11/swrlb
Provides commonly needed built-
ins, e.g., add, subtract, string
manipulation, etc.
Normally aliased as ‘swrlb’.
Contains definition for
stringEqualIgnoreCase
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 51
Example Implementation
Class for Core SWRL Built-in
Methods
package edu.stanford.smi.protegex.owl.swrl.bridge.builtins.swrlb;
import edu.stanford.smi.protegex.owl.swrl.bridge.builtins.*;
import edu.stanford.smi.protegex.owl.swrl.bridge.exceptions.*;
public class SWRLBuiltInMethodsImpl implements SWRLBuiltInMethods
{
public boolean stringEqualIgnoreCase(List arguments) throws BuiltInException { ... }
....
} // SWRLBuiltInMethodsImpl
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 52
Example Implementation for Built-
in swrlb:stringEqualIgnoreCase
private static String SWRLB_SEIC = "stringEqualIgnoreCase";
public boolean stringEqualIgnoreCase(List arguments) throws BuiltInException
{
SWRLBuiltInUtil.checkNumberOfArgumentsEqualTo(SWRLB_SEIC, 2, arguments.size());
String argument1 = SWRLBuiltInUtil.getArgumentAsAString(SWRLB_SEIC, 1, arguments);
String argument2 = SWRLBuiltInUtil.getArgumentAsAString(SWRLB_SEIC, 2, arguments);
return argument1.equalsIgnoreCase(argument2);
} // stringEqualIgnoreCase
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 53
Invocation from Rule
Engine
Use of swrlb:stringEqualIgnoreCase in
rule should cause automatic
invocation.
SWRL rule engine bridge has an
invocation method.
Takes built-in name and arguments
and performs method resolution,
loading, and invocation.
Efficiency a consideration: some
methods should probably be
implemented natively by rule
engine, e,g., add, subtract, etc.
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 54
Using SWRL to Express Protocol
Constraints
On days that both immunotherapy and
omalzumab are administered,
omalzumab must be injected 60 minutes
after immunotherapy.
Patient(?p) ^
hasExtendedEvent(?p, ?eevent1) ^ hasExtendedEvent(?p, ?eevent2) ^ temporal:hasValue(?
eevent1, ?event1) ^ temporal:hasValidTime(?eevent1, ?event1VT) ^ temporal:hasTime(?
event1VT, ?event1Time) ^ temporal:hasValue(?eevent2, ?event2) ^
temporal:hasValidTime(?eevent2, ?event2VT) ^ temporal:hasTime(?event2VT, ?event2Time) ^
hasVisit(?event1, ?v1) ^ hasVisit(?event2, ?v2) ^
hasActivity(?event1, ?a1) ^ hasName(?a1, "Omalizumab") ^
hasActivity(?event2, ?a2) ^ hasName(?a2, "Immunotherapy") ^
temporal:before(?event2Time, ?event1Time) ^
temporal:durationMinutesLessThan(60, ?event2Time, ?event1Time)
-> NonConformingPatient(?p)
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 55
SWRL and Querying
SWRL is a rule language, not a
query language
However, a rule antecedent can
be viewed as a pattern matching
specification, i.e., a query
With built-ins, language
compliant query extensions are
possible.
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 57
A SWRL ‘Query’
Return all adults in ontology:
Person(?p) ^ hasAge(?p, ?age) ^ swrlb:greaterThan(?age, 17)
-> swrlq:select(?p) ^ swrlq:orderBy(?age)
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 58
SWRLQueryTab
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008
SWRLQueryTab:
Displaying Results
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008
SWRLQueryTab
Query functionality added with
built-ins
Interactive query execution with
tabular results display
Low-level JDBC-like API for use in
embedded applications
Can use any existing rule engine
back end
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 61
Use of SWRL as Query Language
is Attractive
Cleaner semantics than SPARQL
OWL-based, not RDF-based
Very extensible via built-ins, e.g.,
temporal queries using temporal
built-ins
Can work with reasoners
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 62
Querying: Semantic Issues
Syntactic SWRL conformance is
easy
However, SWRL is based on OWL-
DL so assumes open world
semantics
Querying closes the world, e.g.,
how many adults in ontology?
Should not make inferences
based on query results –
nonmonotonicity!
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 63
Dealing with Relational
Data
Almost all data are relational
Relational queries are at the
database level not at the knowledge
level
We would like results of queries and
analyses to be added to our store of
knowledge
We need to bridge the gap
Triple stores a longer term solution
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 65
Querying and
Databases
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 66
Querying and
Databases
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 67
Model Mismatch
Relational n-ary tuples vs. RDF-triples
Relational databases can store a lot of
knowledge; typically they don’t
Some mappings can be inferred
The more normalized the database, the
easier it is to infer mappings
Manual user-driven mapping is usually
required
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 68
Solution Requirements
A schema ontology to describe
schema of arbitrary relational
database
A mapping ontology to describe
mapping of data from tuples to
triples
Mapping software to dynamically
map
A query language
A query engine
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 69
User Interface
OWL
Bridge Engine
KB
Mapper
Data
Knowledge
Dynamic Relation-to-OWL
Mapping
Bridge generates optimized
relational queries to retrieve data
Current SPARQL-based systems
D2RQ
D2OMapper
Approach used successfully in
BioSTORM project for surveillance
data
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 71
Optimization
Current ontology tools not
scalable
Databases are scalable: – offload
as much work to RDBMS as
possible
Query engines must optimize
Built-ins are a difficulty and an
opportunity
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 72
Built-in Optimization
Person(?p) ^ hasAge(?p, ?age) ^ swrlb:greaterThan(?age, 17)
-> swrlq:select(?p) ^ swrlq:orderBy(?age)
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 73
Two Approaches
Built-in optimization by
annotating built-in definitions
and exploiting in query engine
Numerical built-in optimizations
Temporal built-in optimizations
In-query optimization to avoid
redundant data requests
Jess with Java Fact Storage Provider
Framework
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 74
Rule/Query Distinction
Significant optimizations possible for
a queries
Optimizations for entire rule bases
not as dramatic – however, still
possible, e.g.,
Analyzing temporal ‘slices’
Analyzing spatial regions
Dealing with reasoners
Database updates?
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 75
Lessons learned so far
SWRL provides a useful though not
magical increase in expressivity
Suited well to some tasks, not to others
Can work well as a query language
Built-ins provide a very nice way to
increase expressivity
Triple-stores are a longer term solution,
but dealing with relational data now is
crucial
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008 76
Part A
Describe the Need for a Rule
Engine
Describe the Generic Execution
Procedure of Rules using a Rule
Engine.
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008
Design Rules for your
Domain
For your project:
Describe using Pseudo-code, some
essential Rules
Describe using SWRL syntax, the
same Rules
Two Rules must contain the use of
Swrl built-ins
Verify if the Rules are consistent
with your OWL Definitions and
Constraints
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008
Essential Readings on
SWRL
Supporting Rule System
Interoperability on the Semantic
Web with SWRL
Martin O’Connor1, Holger
Knublauch1, Samson Tu1, Benjamin
Grosof2, Mike Dean3, William
Grosso4, Mark Musen1
Semantic Web Tutorial –Vahid
2008
How to Make SWRL Rules Safe?
FAST – NU, Islamabad, Fall 2008
