A scalable ontology reasoner via incremental materialization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ontology based knowledge management systems have a lot of potential: their applicability ranges from artificial intelligence, e.g., for knowledge representation and natural language processing, to information integration and retrieval systems, requirements analysis, and, most lately, to semantic web applications and workflow management systems. However the huge complexity of reasoning for ontologies with large TBoxes and/or ABoxes is often a barrier to their applicability in real-world settings especially those which are time sensitive. Materialization is a promising solution for scalable reasoning over ontologies with large ABoxes as it derives the implicit knowledge of an ontology and makes it available in a relational database. Although materialization can reduce the query answering time of an ontology, it has limitations in applications which require frequent update to the knowledge base. To overcome this problem, we developed a tool for incremental materialization which identifies the fragment of the ontology that needs to be updated due to the ABox or TBox change, thereby reducing the complexity of the exhaustive forward chaining required.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".