The Vadalog system: datalog-based reasoning for knowledge graphs
Abstract
Over the past years, there has been a resurgence of Datalog-based systems in the database community as well as in industry. In this context, it has been recognized that to handle the complex knowledge-based scenarios encountered today, such as reasoning over large knowledge graphs, Datalog has to be extended with features such as existential quantification. Yet, Datalog-based reasoning in the presence of existential quantification is in general undecidable. Many efforts have been made to define decidable fragments. Warded Datalog+/- is a very promising one, as it captures PTIME complexity while allowing ontological reasoning. Yet so far, no implementation of Warded Datalog+/- was available. In this paper we present the Vadalog system, a Datalog-based system for performing complex logic reasoning tasks, such as those required in advanced knowledge graphs. The Vadalog system is Oxford's contribution to the VADA research programme, a joint effort of the universities of Oxford, Manchester and Edinburgh and around 20 industrial partners. As the main contribution of this paper, we illustrate the first implementation of Warded Datalog+/-, a high-performance Datalog+/- system utilizing an aggressive termination control strategy. We also provide a comprehensive experimental evaluation.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
VADAORCHESTRA models the workflow itself as a logical reasoning process, representing the entire process as an evolving logic program in Vadalog.
“To this end, we model the workflow itself as a logical reasoning process. Specifically, we represent the entire process, including both structured and dynamic components, as an evolving logic program in Vadalog (Bellomarini, Sallinger, and Gottlob 2018), a Datalog ± (Calì, Gottlob, and Lukasiewicz 2012) -based declarative language.”
From VADAOrchestra: Neurosymbolic Orchestration of Adaptive Reasoning Workflows (2026) · cites this paper as Bellomarini, Sallinger, and Gottlob 2018
Cited by
Sorted by citations
VADAOrchestra: Neurosymbolic Orchestration of Adaptive Reasoning Workflows
Baldazzi, T., Bellomarini, L., Coletta, A., Iezzi, M., Maple, C., Pesare, A., & Sallinger, E. (2026) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2606.22485
“Specifically, we represent the entire process, including both structured and dynamic components, as an evolving logic program in Vadalog (Bellomarini, Sallinger, and Gottlob 2018), a Datalog ± (Calì, Gottlob, and Lukasiewicz 2012) -based declarative language.”
Self-citation
- Authors
- Bellomarini, L., Sallinger, E., & Gottlob, G.
- Affiliations
- Bank of Italy (IT)
- University of Oxford (GB)
- TU Wien (AT)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment
- Published
- 2018-05
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 975-987
- ISSN
- 2150-8097 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2808240130
- Cited by
- 98
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 5
- FWCI
- 8.02
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/M025268/1)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Semantic Web and Ontologies
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Advanced Database Systems and Queries
- Keywords
- Datalog, existential quantification, knowledge graphs, ontology reasoning, logic programming systems
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review