Graphs have emerged as a foundation for a variety of applications, including capturing factual knowledge, semantic data integration, social networks, and informing machine learning algorithms. Formalising properties of the data and ensuring data quality requires describing schemas of such graphs. Driven by diverse applications, the Semantic Web and database communities developed not only different graph data models-RDF and property graphs-but also different graph schema languages-SHACL, ShEx, and PG-Schema. Each language has its unique approach to defining constraints and validating graph data, leaving potential users in the dark about their commonalities and differences. In this paper, we provide concise formal definitions of the core components of these languages, employ a uniform framework to facilitate a comprehensive comparison between them, and identify a common set of functionalities, shedding light on both overlapping and distinctive features.

A key prerequisite for the successful adoption of the Shapes Constraint Language (SHACL)---the W3C standardized constraint language for RDF graphs---is the availability of automated tools that efficiently validate targeted constraints (known as shapes graphs ) over possibly very large RDF graphs. There are already significant efforts to produce optimized engines for SHACL validation, but they focus on restricted fragments of SHACL. For unrestricted SHACL, that is SHACL with unrestricted recursion and negation, there is no validator beyond a proof-of-concept prototype, and existing techniques are inherently incompatible with the goal-driven approaches being pursued by existing validators. Instead they require a global computation on the entire data graph that is not only computationally very costly, but also brittle, and can easily result in validation failures due to conflicts that are irrelevant to the validation targets. To address these challenges, we present a 'magic' transformation---based on Magic Sets as known from Logic Programming---that transforms a SHACL shapes graph S into a new shapes graph S' whose validation considers only the relevant neighbourhood of the targeted nodes. The new S' is equivalent to S whenever there are no conflicts between the constraints and the data, and in case the validation of S fails due to conflicts that are irrelevant to the target, S' may still admit a lazy, target-oriented validation. We implement the algorithm and run preliminary experiments, showing our approach can be a stepping stone towards validators for full SHACL, and that it can significantly improve the performance of the only prototype validator that currently supports full recursion and negation.

The goal of this paper is to understand the relative expressiveness of the query language in which queries are specified by a set of guarded (disjunctive) tuple-generating dependencies (TGDs) and an output (or 'answer') predicate. Our main result is to show that every such query can be translated into a polynomially-sized (disjunctive) Datalog program if the maximal number of variables in the (disjunctive) TGDs is bounded by a constant. To overcome the challenge that Datalog has no direct means to express the existential quantification present in TGDs, we define a two-player game that characterizes the satisfaction of the dependencies, and design a Datalog query that can decide the existence of a winning strategy for the game. For guarded disjunctive TGDs, we can obtain Datalog rules with disjunction in the heads. However, the use of disjunction is limited, and the resulting rules fall into a fragment that can be evaluated in deterministic single exponential time. We proceed quite differently for the case when the TGDs are not disjunctive and we show that we can obtain a plain Datalog query. Notably, unlike previous translations for related fragments, our translation requires only polynomial time if the maximal number of variables in the (disjunctive) TGDs is bounded by a constant.

SPARQL entailment regimes are strongly influenced by the big body of works on ontology-based query answering, notably in the area of Description Logics (DLs). However, the semantics of query answering under SPARQL entailment regimes is defined in a more naive and much less expressive way than the certain answer semantics usually adopted in DLs. The goal of this work is to introduce an intuitive certain answer semantics also for SPARQL and to show the feasibility of this approach. For OWL 2 QL entailment, we present algorithms for the evaluation of an interesting fragment of SPARQL (the so-called well-designed SPARQL). Moreover, we show that the complexity of the most fundamental query analysis tasks (such as query containment and equivalence testing) is not negatively affected by the presence of OWL 2 QL entailment under the proposed semantics.