Strengthening LargeRDFBench for Interoperable Federated SPARQL Evaluation
2026-08-31 • Databases
Databases
AI summaryⓘ
The authors found problems with LargeRDFBench, a popular test for federated SPARQL query engines, including data that didn't follow RDF rules and expected results in an unclear format. They fixed the data issues using a cleaning process that makes the data follow official RDF standards and re-encoded the expected results in a clear, standard format. Their work allows more engines to be tested fairly and reproducibly. They also discovered some differences between their cleaned results and the original ones, and explored how different ways of choosing data sources affect query results.
LargeRDFBenchfederated SPARQL query enginesRDF specificationsdata cleaning pipelineSPARQL 1.1 Query Results JSON Formatsource selectionFedX algorithmdata reproducibilityexpected resultsRDF parsers
Authors
Bryan-Elliott Tam, Muhammad Saleem, Ruben Taelman
Abstract
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.