A Review of SHACL: From Data Validation to Schema Reasoning for RDF Graphs | Reasoning Web. Declarative Artificial Intelligence (2024)

Article

Authors: Paolo Pareti, George Konstantinidis

Reasoning Web. Declarative Artificial Intelligence : 17th International Summer School 2021, Leuven, Belgium, September 8–15, 2021, Tutorial Lectures

Pages 115 - 144

Published: 08 September 2021 Publication History

Metrics

Total Citations1Total Downloads0

Last 12 Months0

Last 6 weeks0

New Citation Alert added!

This alert has been successfully added and will be sent to:

You will be notified whenever a record that you have chosen has been cited.

To manage your alert preferences, click on the button below.

Manage my Alerts

New Citation Alert!

Please log in to your account

    • View Options
    • References
    • Media
    • Tables
    • Share

Abstract

We present an introduction and a review of Shapes Constraint Language (shacl), the W3C recommendation language for validating rdf data. A shacl document describes a set of constraints on rdf nodes, and a graph is valid with respect to the document if its nodes satisfy these constraints. We revisit the basic concepts of the language, its constructs and components and their interaction. We review the different formal frameworks used to study this language and the different semantics proposed. We examine a number of related problems, from containment and satisfiability to the interaction of shacl with inference rules, and exhibit how different modellings of the language are useful for different problems. We also cover practical aspects of shacl, discussing its implementations and state of adoption, to present a holistic review useful to practitioners and theoreticians alike.

References

[1]

Amarilli, A., Benedikt, M., Bourhis, P., Vanden Boom, M.: Query answering with transitive and linear-ordered data. In: IJCAI 2016, pp. 893–899 (2016)

[2]

Al Bassit, A., Krasnashchok, K., Skhiri, S., Mustapha, M.: Automated Compliance Checking with SHACL (2020)

[3]

Andresel, M., Corman, J., Ortiz, M., Reutter, J.L., Savkovic, O., Simkus, M.: Stable model semantics for recursive SHACL. In: Proceedings of The Web Conference 2020, pp. 1570–1580. WWW 2020 (2020)

[4]

Benedikt, M., et al.: Benchmarking the chase. In: Proceedings of the 36th ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGAI Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, pp. 37–52. ACM (2017)

[5]

Berger R The undecidability of the domino problem MAMS 1966 66 1-72

[6]

Boneva, I., Dusart, J., Fernández Alvarez, D., Gayo, J.E.L.: Shape designer for ShEx and SHACL constraints. In: ISWC 2019–18th International Semantic Web Conference, Poster, October 2019

[7]

Brickley, D., Guha, R.: RDF schema 1.1. W3C recommendation, W3C, February 2014. https://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-rdf-schema-20140225/

[8]

Čerāns, K., Ovčinnikova, J., Bojārs, U., Grasmanis, M., Lāce, L., Romāne, A.: Schema-Backed Visual Queries over Europeana and other Linked Data Resources. In: ESWC2021 Poster and Demo Track (2021)

[9]

Ceri S, Gottlob G, and Tanca L What you always wanted to know about datalog (and never dared to ask) IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 1989 1 1 146-166

[10]

Cimmino, A., Fernández-Izquierdo, A., García-Castro, R.: Astrea: automatic generation of SHACL shapes from ontologies. In: The Semantic Web, pp. 497–513. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2020)

[11]

Corman, J., Florenzano, F., Reutter, J.L., Savkovic, O.: SHACL2SPARQL: validating a SPARQL endpoint against recursive SHACL constraints. In: International Semantic Web Conference ISWC Satellite Events, pp. 165–168 (2019)

[12]

Corman J, Florenzano F, Reutter JL, Savković O, et al. Ghidini C et al. Validating Shacl constraints over a Sparql endpoint The Semantic Web – ISWC 2019 2019 Cham Springer 145-163

[13]

Corman J, Reutter JL, Savković O, et al. Vrandečić D et al. Semantics and Validation of Recursive SHACL The Semantic Web – ISWC 2018 2018 Cham Springer 318-336

[14]

Cyganiak, R., Wood, D., Markus Lanthaler, G.: RDF 1.1 concepts and abstract syntax. W3C Recommendation, W3C (2014). http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-rdf11-concepts-20140225/

[15]

Danielski, D., Kieronski, E.: Finite Satisfiability of Unary Negation Fragment with Transitivity. In: MFCS 2019, pp. 17:1–15. LIPIcs 138, Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik (2019)

[16]

Di Ciccio, C., Ekaputra, F.J., Cecconi, A., Ekelhart, A., Kiesling, E.: Finding Non-compliances with Declarative Process Constraints Through Semantic Technologies. In: Cappiello, C., Ruiz, M. (eds.) Information Systems Engineering in Responsible Information Systems, pp. 60–74 (2019)

[17]

Ekaputra, F.J., Lin, X.: SHACL4P: SHACL constraints validation within Protégé ontology editor. In: 2016 International Conference on Data and Software Engineering (ICoDSE), pp. 1–6 (2016)

[18]

Figuera, M., Rohde, P.D., Vidal, M.E.: Trav-SHACL: efficiently validating networks of SHACL constraints. In: Proceedings of the Web Conference 2021, pp. 3337–3348. WWW 2021, Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2021)

[19]

Gangemi, A., Presutti, V.: Ontology Design Patterns, pp. 221–243. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg (2009)

[20]

Jung, J., Lutz, C., Martel, M., Schneider, T.: Querying the Unary Negation Fragment with Regular Path Expressions. In: ICDT 2018, pp. 15:1–18. OpenProceedings.org (2018)

[21]

K Soman, R.: Modelling construction scheduling constraints using shapes constraint language (SHACL). In: 2019 European Conference on Computing in Construction, pp. 351–358. University College Dublin (2019)

[22]

Keuchel D and Spicher N Automatic detection of metadata errors in a registry of clinical studies using shapes constraint language (SHACL) graphs Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 2021 281 372-376

[23]

Knublauch, H., Kontokostas, D.: Shapes Constraint Language (SHACL). W3C Recommendation, W3C (2017). https://www.w3.org/TR/shacl/

[24]

Kontokostas, D., et al.: Test-driven evaluation of linked data quality. In: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on World Wide Web, pp. 747–758. WWW 2014. ACM (2014)

[25]

Larhrib M, Escribano M, Cerrada C, and Escribano JJ Converting OCL and CGMES rules to SHACL in smart grids IEEE Access 2020 8 177255-177266

[26]

Leinberger M, Seifer P, Rienstra T, Lämmel R, Staab S, et al. Pan JZ et al. Deciding SHACL shape containment through description logics reasoning The Semantic Web – ISWC 2020 2020 Cham Springer 366-383

[27]

Leinberger M, Seifer P, Schon C, Lämmel R, Staab S, et al. Ghidini C et al. Type checking program code using SHACL The Semantic Web – ISWC 2019 2019 Cham Springer 399-417

[28]

Lieber, S., et al.: Visual Notations for Viewing and Editing RDF Constraints with UnSHACLed. Semantic Web (2021). (under review)

[29]

Lieber, S., Dimou, A., Verborgh, R.: Statistics about data shape use in RDF data. In: ISWC (Demos/Industry) (2020)

[30]

Marnette, B.: Generalized schema-mappings: from termination to tractability. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-eighth ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, pp. 13–22. ACM (2009)

[31]

Musen MA Protégé Team: The Protégé Project: A Look Back and a Look Forward AI Matters 2015 1 4 4-12

[32]

Nenadić, K.R., Gavrić, M.M., Durdević, V.I.: Validation of CIM datasets using SHACL. In: 2017 25th Telecommunication Forum (TELFOR), pp. 1–4 (2017)

[33]

Omran, P.G., Taylor, K., Mendez, S.R., Haller, A.: Learning SHACL Shapes from Knowledge Graphs. Semantic Web (2021). (under review)

[34]

Pandit, H.J., O’Sullivan, D., Lewis, D.: Using ontology design patterns to define SHACL shapes. In: 9th Workshop on Ontology Design and Patterns (WOP2018), International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC), pp. 67–71 (2018)

[35]

Pandit HJ, O’Sullivan D, Lewis D, et al. Acosta M et al. Test-driven approach towards GDPR compliance Semantic Systems. The Power of AI and Knowledge Graphs 2019 Cham Springer 19-33

[36]

Pareti, P., Konstantinidis, G., Mogavero, F.: Satisfiability and Containment of Recursive SHACL (2021). arXiv preprint 2108.13063

[37]

Pareti P, Konstantinidis G, Mogavero F, Norman TJ, et al. Pan JZ et al. SHACL satisfiability and containment The Semantic Web – ISWC 2020 2020 Cham Springer 474-493

[38]

Pareti P, Konstantinidis G, Norman TJ, Şensoy M, et al. Ghidini C et al. SHACL constraints with inference rules The Semantic Web – ISWC 2019 2019 Cham Springer 539-557

[39]

Robinson R Undecidability and nonperiodicity for tilings of the plane IM 1971 12 177-209

[40]

Savković O, Kharlamov E, Lamparter S, et al. Hitzler P et al. Validation of SHACL constraints over KGs with OWL 2 QL ontologies via rewriting The Semantic Web 2019 Cham Springer 314-329

[41]

Schaffenrath R et al. Gutiérrez-Basulto V, Kliegr T, Soylu A, Giese M, Roman D, et al. Benchmark for performance evaluation of SHACL implementations in graph databases Rules and Reasoning 2020 Cham Springer 82-96

[42]

Seaborne, A., Harris, S.: SPARQL 1.1 query language. W3C recommendation, W3C, March 2013. https://www.w3.org/TR/2013/REC-sparql11-query-20130321/

[43]

Šenkýř D Pergl R, Babkin E, Lock R, Malyzhenkov P, and Merunka V SHACL shapes generation from textual documents Enterprise and Organizational Modeling and Simulation 2019 Cham Springer 121-130

[44]

Spahiu, B., Maurino, A., Palmonari, M.: Towards improving the quality of knowledge graphs with data-driven ontology patterns and SHACL. In: International Semantic Web Conference ISWC Sattelite Events, pp. 103–117 (2018)

[45]

Spahiu B, Porrini R, Palmonari M, Rula A, Maurino A, et al. Sack H et al. ABSTAT: ontology-driven linked data summaries with pattern minimalization The Semantic Web 2016 Cham Springer 381-395

[46]

Stani E Design reusable SHACL shapes and implement a linked data validation pipeline Code4Lib. J. 2019 45 1-12

[47]

Stolk, S., McGlinn, K.: Validation of IfcOWL datasets using SHACL. In: Proceedings of the 8th Linked Data in Architecture and Construction Workshop, pp. 91–104 (2020)

[48]

Thornton K, et al., et al. Hitzler P, et al., et al. Using shape expressions (ShEx) to share RDF data models and to guide curation with rigorous validation The Semantic Web 2019 Cham Springer 606-620

[49]

W3C OWL Working Group: OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Document Overview (Second Edition). W3C recommendation, W3C (Dec 2012). https://www.w3.org/TR/2012/REC-owl2-overview-20121211/

[50]

Wang H Proving theorems by pattern recognition II BSTJ 1961 40 1-41

[51]

Wright J, Rodríguez Méndez SJ, Haller A, Taylor K, Omran PG, et al. Pan JZ et al. Schímatos: a SHACL-based web-form generator for knowledge graph editing The Semantic Web – ISWC 2020 2020 Cham Springer 65-80

Cited By

View all

  • Felin RFaron CTettamanzi A(2023)A Framework toInclude andExploit Probabilistic Information inSHACL Validation ReportsThe Semantic Web10.1007/978-3-031-33455-9_6(91-104)Online publication date: 28-May-2023

    https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-031-33455-9_6

Index Terms

  1. A Review of SHACL: From Data Validation to Schema Reasoning for RDF Graphs

    1. Computing methodologies

      1. Artificial intelligence

        1. Knowledge representation and reasoning

      2. Information systems

        1. Data management systems

          1. Database design and models

        2. Software and its engineering

          1. Theory of computation

            1. Logic

              1. Constraint and logic programming

          Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

          Recommendations

          • The role of reasoning for RDF validation

            SEMANTICS '15: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Semantic Systems

            For data practitioners embracing the world of RDF and Linked Data, the openness and flexibility is a mixed blessing. For them, data validation according to predefined constraints is a much sought-after feature, particularly as this is taken for granted ...

            Read More

          • Fuzzy Reasoning over RDF Data Using OWL Vocabulary

            WI-IAT '11: Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conferences on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology - Volume 01

            In this paper, we propose fuzzy pD* semantics which generalizes pD* semantics to reason over fuzzy RDF data using OWL vocabulary. We first define the notions of fuzzy RDF graph and fuzzy pD* interpretation. We then present a set of fuzzy pD*entailment ...

            Read More

          • Interpreting SWRL Rules in RDF Graphs

            An unresolved issue in SWRL (the Semantic Web Rule Language) is whether the intended semantics of its RDF representation can be described as an extension of the W3C RDF semantics. In this paper we propose to make the model-theoretic semantics of SWRL ...

            Read More

          Comments

          Information & Contributors

          Information

          Published In

          A Review of SHACL: From Data Validation to Schema Reasoning for RDF Graphs | Reasoning Web. Declarative Artificial Intelligence (3)

          Reasoning Web. Declarative Artificial Intelligence : 17th International Summer School 2021, Leuven, Belgium, September 8–15, 2021, Tutorial Lectures

          Sep 2021

          193 pages

          ISBN:978-3-030-95480-2

          DOI:10.1007/978-3-030-95481-9

          • Editors:
          • Mantas Šimkus

            TU Wien, Vienna, Austria

            ,
          • Ivan Varzinczak

            Université d'Artois and CNRS, Lens, France

          © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022.

          Publisher

          Springer-Verlag

          Berlin, Heidelberg

          Publication History

          Published: 08 September 2021

          Qualifiers

          • Article

          Contributors

          A Review of SHACL: From Data Validation to Schema Reasoning for RDF Graphs | Reasoning Web. Declarative Artificial Intelligence (6)

          Other Metrics

          View Article Metrics

          Bibliometrics & Citations

          Bibliometrics

          Article Metrics

          • 1

            Total Citations

            View Citations
          • Total Downloads

          • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
          • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

          Reflects downloads up to 30 Sep 2024

          Other Metrics

          View Author Metrics

          Citations

          Cited By

          View all

          • Felin RFaron CTettamanzi A(2023)A Framework toInclude andExploit Probabilistic Information inSHACL Validation ReportsThe Semantic Web10.1007/978-3-031-33455-9_6(91-104)Online publication date: 28-May-2023

            https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-031-33455-9_6

          View Options

          View options

          Get Access

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in

          Full Access

          Get this Publication

          Media

          Figures

          Other

          Tables

          A Review of SHACL: From Data Validation to Schema Reasoning for RDF Graphs | Reasoning Web. Declarative Artificial Intelligence (2024)
          Top Articles
          Latest Posts
          Recommended Articles
          Article information

          Author: Tish Haag

          Last Updated:

          Views: 6079

          Rating: 4.7 / 5 (67 voted)

          Reviews: 90% of readers found this page helpful

          Author information

          Name: Tish Haag

          Birthday: 1999-11-18

          Address: 30256 Tara Expressway, Kutchburgh, VT 92892-0078

          Phone: +4215847628708

          Job: Internal Consulting Engineer

          Hobby: Roller skating, Roller skating, Kayaking, Flying, Graffiti, Ghost hunting, scrapbook

          Introduction: My name is Tish Haag, I am a excited, delightful, curious, beautiful, agreeable, enchanting, fancy person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.