A Generic Approach for Correcting Access Restrictions to a Consequence

Abstract

Abstract. Recent research has shown that annotations are useful for representing access restrictions to the axioms of an ontology and their implicit consequences. Previous work focused on assigning a label, representing its access level, to each consequence from a given ontology. However, a security administrator might not be satisfied with the access level obtained through these methods. In this case, one is interested in finding which axioms would need to get their access restrictions modified in order to get the desired label for the consequence. In this paper we look at this problem and present algorithms for solving it with a variety of optimizations. We also present first experimental results on large scale ontologies, which show that our methods perform well in practice.

Context-dependent views to axioms and consequences of Semantic Web ontologies

“…This paper extends and improves the results previously published in [14,15]. More precisely, the algorithms for computing the boundaries of consequences were presented in [14], while the problem of repairing the boundaries was addressed in [15].…”

“…This paper extends and improves the results previously published in [14,15]. More precisely, the algorithms for computing the boundaries of consequences were presented in [14], while the problem of repairing the boundaries was addressed in [15]. Here, we (i) provide full proofs for all the theoretical results presented, (ii) present better optimizations to our algorithms, and (iii) provide a thorough comparison of the different algorithmic approaches through our experimental results.…”

Explaining Axiom Pinpointing

“…Another application is in the context of access control, where one wants to provide only partial views to an ontology to different users [4]. Here, axiom pinpointing is not only useful to find out the access levels (that is, the contexts) where a consequence is derivable, but also to suggest changes in the access level of axioms in order to hide or open implicit consequences to some users [28].…”

Using provenance to debug changing ontologies

“…Moreover, the modularization step is not included in the evaluation. [22] extends the approach towards explanations and debugging of access rights. In contrast, our approach is built on modularization at its core without a need for preprocessing and generates explanations while computing provenance.…”