Advertisement

SQUALL: A Controlled Natural Language as Expressive as SPARQL 1.1

  • Sébastien Ferré
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7934)

Abstract

The Semantic Web is now made of billions of triples, which are available as Linked Open Data (LOD) or as RDF stores. The most common approach to access RDF datasets is through SPARQL, an expressive query language. However, SPARQL is difficult to learn for most users because it exhibits low-level notions of relational algebra such as union, filters, or grouping. We present SQUALL, a high-level language for querying and updating an RDF dataset. It has a strong compliance with RDF, covers all features of SPARQL 1.1, and has a controlled natural language syntax that completely abstracts from low-level notions. SQUALL is available as two web services: one for translating a SQUALL sentence to a SPARQL query or update, and another for directly querying a SPARQL endpoint such as DBpedia.

Keywords

Natural Language Noun Phrase Relational Algebra Graph Pattern SPARQL Query 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bernstein, A., Kaufmann, E., Kaiser, C.: Querying the semantic web with Ginseng: A guided input natural language search engine. In: Work. Information Technology and Systems, WITS (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ceri, S., Gottlob, G., Tanca, L.: What you always wanted to know about datalog (and never dared to ask). IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 1(1), 146–166 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Damljanovic, D., Agatonovic, M., Cunningham, H.: Identification of the question focus: Combining syntactic analysis and ontology-based lookup through the user interaction. In: Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC). ELRA (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dowty, D.R., Wall, R.E., Peters, S.: Introduction to Montague Semantics. D. Reidel Publishing Company (1981)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ferré, S.: SQUALL: a controlled natural language for querying and updating RDF graphs. In: Kuhn, T., Fuchs, N.E. (eds.) CNL 2012. LNCS, vol. 7427, pp. 11–25. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ferré, S., Hermann, A.: Reconciling faceted search and query languages for the Semantic Web. Int. J. Metadata, Semantics and Ontologies 7(1), 37–54 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fuchs, N.E., Kaljurand, K., Schneider, G.: Attempto Controlled English meets the challenges of knowledge representation, reasoning, interoperability and user interfaces. In: Sutcliffe, G., Goebel, R. (eds.) FLAIRS Conference, pp. 664–669. AAAI Press (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fuchs, N.E., Schwitter, R.: Web-annotations for humans and machines. In: Franconi, E., Kifer, M., May, W. (eds.) ESWC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4519, pp. 458–472. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Haase, P., Broekstra, J., Eberhart, A., Volz, R.: A comparison of RDF query languages. In: McIlraith, S.A., Plexousakis, D., van Harmelen, F. (eds.) ISWC 2004. LNCS, vol. 3298, pp. 502–517. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hermann, A., Ferré, S., Ducassé, M.: An interactive guidance process supporting consistent updates of RDFS graphs. In: ten Teije, A., Völker, J., Handschuh, S., Stuckenschmidt, H., d’Acquin, M., Nikolov, A., Aussenac-Gilles, N., Hernandez, N. (eds.) EKAW 2012. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 7603, pp. 185–199. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hildebrand, M., van Ossenbruggen, J., Hardman, L.: /facet: A browser for heterogeneous semantic web repositories. In: Cruz, I., Decker, S., Allemang, D., Preist, C., Schwabe, D., Mika, P., Uschold, M., Aroyo, L.M. (eds.) ISWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4273, pp. 272–285. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hitzler, P., Krötzsch, M., Rudolph, S.: Foundations of Semantic Web Technologies. Chapman & Hall/CRC (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kaufmann, E., Bernstein, A.: Evaluating the usability of natural language query languages and interfaces to semantic web knowledge bases. J. Web Semantics 8(4), 377–393 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lopez, V., Uren, V., Motta, E., Pasin, M.: Aqualog: An ontology-driven question answering system for organizational semantic intranets. Journal of Web Semantics 5(2), 72–105 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Montague, R.: Universal grammar. Theoria 36, 373–398 (1970)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Oren, E., Delbru, R., Decker, S.: Extending faceted navigation for RDF data. In: Cruz, I., Decker, S., Allemang, D., Preist, C., Schwabe, D., Mika, P., Uschold, M., Aroyo, L.M. (eds.) ISWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4273, pp. 559–572. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pérez, J., Arenas, M., Gutierrez, C.: Semantics and complexity of SPARQL. In: Cruz, I., Decker, S., Allemang, D., Preist, C., Schwabe, D., Mika, P., Uschold, M., Aroyo, L.M. (eds.) ISWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4273, pp. 30–43. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Schwitter, R., Kaljurand, K., Cregan, A., Dolbear, C., Hart, G.: A comparison of three controlled natural languages for OWL 1.1. In: Clark, K., Patel-Schneider, P.F. (eds.) Workshop on OWL: Experiences and Directions (OWLED), vol. 258. CEUR-WS (2008)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Smart, P.: Controlled natural languages and the semantic web. Tech. rep., School of Electronics and Computer Science University of Southampton (2008), http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/15735/

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sébastien Ferré
    • 1
  1. 1.IRISAUniversité de Rennes 1Rennes cedexFrance

Personalised recommendations