Ruben Taelman | arXiv Science

arXiv2026

Does SRL Pave the Road to Explainable Reasoning? Lessons Learned from an Implementer's Perspective

The Shape Rules Language (SRL) Working Draft defines how to derive new RDF triples from an RDF graph using inference rules. Each rule matches graph patterns and instantiates triple templates whose output feeds into validation pipelines, SPARQL queries, or further inference. RDF reasoning has traditionally relied on fixed entailment regimes (RDFS, OWL), rule-based ad-hoc languages such as N3, or other implementation-specific solutions without a shared standard. SRL introduces user-defined production rules with a defined grammar, dependency analysis, execution ordering, and termination guarantees. However, no authoritative implementation exists, leaving practitioners with little guidance on how to build a conformant engine or on what problems the language can solve. We implemented two SRL engines and evaluated both on classical RDF reasoning tasks for soundness, completeness, and speed. The first reuses an existing SPARQL query engine and its query parser; the second is a dedicated engine. The SPARQL-based engine reused an existing modular parser for query construction and SPARQL CONSTRUCT for triple production, reducing engine-specific work. The dedicated engine was two to six times faster, the gap widening as rule sets grow. Both engines were validated against the SRL conformance test suite, supplemented by additional use-case-driven tests. A usable SRL engine can be built inexpensively on top of a SPARQL engine, with a moderate speed trade-off that a dedicated implementation recovers. Despite the specification's immaturity, the language already supports practically useful reasoning tasks.

cs.DB↗

arXiv2026

Strengthening LargeRDFBench for Interoperable Federated SPARQL Evaluation

LargeRDFBench is one of the most comprehensive benchmarks for evaluating federated SPARQL query engines, combining real, interlinked datasets with a rich query suite that has made it a reference point for the community. Evaluations of federated engines are published by comparing engine results against the benchmark's expected results, so those expected results must themselves be reproducible. Moreover, several of its data dumps violate the RDF specifications, so only engines that parse RDF leniently can host them, and its expected results are distributed in an ad hoc format. We identify, categorize and repair these data-quality issues with a reproducible cleaning pipeline, producing standards-conformant serializations of every affected dataset. Furthermore, we re-encode the benchmark's expected results in the W3C SPARQL 1.1 Query Results JSON Format and correct their discrepancies. Every dataset now parses under strict RDF parsers, and the expected results are machine-verifiable through a standard format, extending the benchmark's reach to the full range of conformant engines while staying faithful to the original data. Reproducing the expected results end-to-end with an independent implementation uncovers corruption in the published reference, and discrepancies between our results and the original ones, some not trivial to resolve, others open questions. We further perform a preliminary comparison, not previously explored, of ASK- and COUNT-based source selection in the FedX algorithm. This work strengthens an already valuable community resource by aligning its artifacts with the RDF standards, broadening the set of engines that can be fairly and reproducibly compared. We also raise the question of how the results of federated queries under automatic source selection can be made reproducible.

cs.DB↗