Keywords: linked open data, reasoning, justification
Abstract: A number of Knowledge Graphs (KGs) on the Web of Data contain contradicting statements, and therefore are logically inconsistent. This makes reasoning limited and the knowledge formally useless. Understanding how these contradictions are formed, how often they occur, and how they vary between different KGs is essential for fixing such contradictions, or developing better tools that handle inconsistent KGs. Methods exist to explain a single contradiction, by finding the minimal set of axioms sufficient to produce it, a process known as justification retrieval. In large KGs, these justifications can be frequent and might redundantly refer to the same type of modelling mistake. Furthermore, these justifications are --by definition-- domain dependent, and hence difficult to interpret or compare. This paper uses the notion of anti-pattern for generalising these justifications, and presents an approach for detecting almost all anti-patterns from any inconsistent KG. Experiments on KGs of over 28 billion triples show the scalability of this approach, and the benefits of anti-patterns for analysing and comparing logical errors between different KGs.
First Author Is Student: Yes
Subtrack: Ontologies and Reasoning