We adapt existing approaches for privacy-preserving publishing of linked data to a setting where the data are given as Description Logic (DL) ABoxes with possibly anonymised (formally: existentially quantified) individuals and the privacy policies are expressed using sets of concepts of the DL EL. We provide a chacterization of compliance of such ABoxes w.r.t. EL policies, and show how optimal compliant anonymisations of ABoxes that are non-compliant can be computed. This work extends previous work on privacy-preserving ontology publishing, in which a very restricted form of ABoxes, called instance stores, had been considered, but restricts the attention to compliance. The approach developed here can easily be adapted to the problem of computing optimal repairs of quantified ABoxes.
The application of automated reasoning approaches to Description Logic (DL) ontologies may produce certain consequences that either are deemed to be wrong or should be hidden for privacy reasons. The question is then how to repair the ontology such that the unwanted consequences can no longer be deduced. An optimal repair is one where the least amount of other consequences is removed. Most of the previous approaches to ontology repair are of a syntactic nature in that they remove or weaken the axioms explicitly present in the ontology, and thus cannot achieve semantic optimality. In previous work, we have addressed the problem of computing optimal repairs of (quantified) ABoxes, where the unwanted consequences are described by concept assertions of the lightweight DL $$\mathcal {EL}$$
EL
. In the present paper, we improve on the results achieved so far in two ways. First, we allow for the presence of terminological knowledge in the form of an $$\mathcal {EL}$$
EL
TBox. This TBox is assumed to be static in the sense that it cannot be changed in the repair process. Second, the construction of optimal repairs described in our previous work is best case exponential. We introduce an optimized construction that is exponential only in the worst case. First experimental results indicate that this reduces the size of the computed optimal repairs considerably.
Ontologies based on Description Logic (DL) represent general background knowledge in a terminology (TBox) and the actual data in an ABox. DL systems can then be used to compute consequences (such as answers to certain queries) from an ontology consisting of a TBox and an ABox. Since both human-made and machine-learned data sets may contain errors, which manifest themselves as unintuitive or obviously incorrect consequences, repairing DL-based ontologies in the sense of removing such unwanted consequences is an important topic in DL research. Most of the repair approaches described in the literature produce repairs that are not optimal, in the sense that they do not guarantee that only a minimal set of consequences is removed. In a series of papers, we have developed an approach for computing optimal repairs, starting with the restricted setting of an EL instance store, extending this to the more general setting of a quantified ABox (where some individuals may be anonymous), and then adding a static EL TBox. Here, we extend the expressivity of the underlying DL considerably, by adding nominals, inverse roles, regular role inclusions and the bottom concept to EL, which yields a fragment of the well-known DL Horn-SROIQ. The ideas underlying our repair approach still apply to this DL, though several non-trivial extensions are needed to deal with the new constructors and axioms. The developed repair approach can also be used to treat unwanted consequences expressed by certain conjunctive queries or regular path queries, and to handle Horn-ALCOI TBoxes with regular role inclusions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.