• Home
  • Search
  • Evaluating and Benchmarking SPARQL Query Containment Solvers
  • Cite Icon15
  • https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41338-4_26Copy DOI Icon

Evaluating and Benchmarking SPARQL Query Containment Solvers

  • Jan 1, 2013
  • Melisachew Wudage Chekol +3 more
Show More
  • Abstract
  • Literature Map
  • References
  • Citations
  • Similar Papers
Abstract

Query containment is the problem of deciding if the answers to a query are included in those of another query for any queried database. This problem is very important for query optimization purposes. In the SPARQL context, it can be equally useful. This problem has recently been investigated theoretically and some query containment solvers are available. Yet, there were no benchmarks to compare theses systems and foster their improvement. In order to experimentally assess implementation strengths and limitations, we provide a first SPARQL containment test benchmark. It has been designed with respect to both the capabilities of existing solvers and the study of typical queries. Some solvers support optional constructs and cycles, while other solvers support projection, union of conjunctive queries and RDF Schemas. No solver currently supports all these features or OWL entailment regimes. The study of query demographics on DBPedia logs shows that the vast majority of queries are acyclic and a significant part of them uses UNION or projection. We thus test available solvers on their domain of applicability on three different benchmark suites. These experiments show that (i) tested solutions are overall functionally correct, (ii) in spite of its complexity, SPARQL query containment is practicable for acyclic queries, (iii) state-of-the-art solvers are at an early stage both in terms of capability and implementation.

Similar Papers
  • Research Article
  • Citations2

Solving the SPARQL query containment problem with SpeCS

  • Dec 05, 2022
  • Journal of Web Semantics
  • Mirko Spasić +1
  • Research Article
  • Citations5

Monadic Datalog, Tree Validity, and Limited Access Containment

  • Oct 04, 2019
  • ACM Transactions on Computational Logic
  • Michael Benedikt +3
  • PDF
  • Research Article
  • Citations3

COMPARING THE PERFORMANCE OF SEMANTIC IMAGE RETRIEVAL USING SPARQL QUERY, DECISION TREE ALGORITHM AND LIRE

  • Aug 01, 2013
  • Journal of Computer Science
  • Magesh
  • Research Article
  • Citations9

Bag Query Containment and Information Theory

  • Sep 28, 2021
  • ACM Transactions on Database Systems
  • Mahmoud Abo Khamis +3
  • Conference Article
  • Citations34

Answering UCQs under Updates and in the Presence of Integrity Constraints

  • Jan 01, 2018
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Christoph Berkholz +2
  • Research Article
  • Citations148

Containment of conjunctive queries

  • Sep 01, 1995
  • ACM Transactions on Database Systems
  • Yannis E Ioannidis +1
  • Book Chapter

2 - Manipulating Query Expressions

  • Jan 01, 2012
  • Principles of Data Integration
  • Anhai Doan +2
  • Research Article
  • Citations25

Query Languages for Data Exchange: Beyond Unions of Conjunctive Queries

  • Mar 23, 2010
  • Theory of Computing Systems
  • Marcelo Arenas +2
  • Research Article
  • Citations2

Bag Semantics Conjunctive Query Containment. Four Small Steps Towards Undecidability.

  • May 10, 2024
  • Proceedings of the ACM on Management of Data
  • Jerzy Marcinkowski +1
  • Book Chapter
  • Citations3

Containment of Expressive SPARQL Navigational Queries

  • Jan 01, 2016
  • Melisachew Wudage Chekol +1
  • Research Article
  • Citations419

Hypertree Decompositions and Tractable Queries

  • May 01, 2002
  • Journal of Computer and System Sciences
  • Georg Gottlob +2
  • Book Chapter

On Query Containment Problem for Conjunctive Queries Under Bag-Set Semantics

  • Jan 01, 2015
  • Victor Felea +1
  • Research Article
  • Citations81

On preservation under homomorphisms and unions of conjunctive queries

  • Mar 01, 2006
  • Journal of the ACM
  • Albert Atserias +2
  • Conference Article
  • Citations8

Solving a Special Case of the Intensional vs Extensional Conjecture in Probabilistic Databases

  • Jun 14, 2020
  • Mikaël Monet
  • Conference Article
  • Citations177

Ontological queries: Rewriting and optimization

  • Apr 01, 2011
  • Georg Gottlob +2
Cactus Communications logo

Copyright 2026 Cactus Communications. All rights reserved.