# Shape Fragments

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/2112.11796 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/2112.11796/

## Key facts

- No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- Builds on 6 of its 61 references that are in the map.
- First posted on arXiv 22 Dec 2021.

## Builds on (most cited first, 6 of 6)

- [G-CORE: A Core for Future Graph Query Languages](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1712.01550/) (2017)
- [Deciding SHACL Shape Containment through Description Logics Reasoning (Extended Version)](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2008.13603/) (2020)
- [Fixpoint Semantics for Recursive SHACL](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2109.08285/) (2021)
- [Trav-SHACL: Efficiently Validating Networks of SHACL Constraints](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2101.07136/) (2021)
- [Semiring Provenance for First-Order Model Checking](https://mlsanity.com/paper/1712.01980/) (2017)
- [Creating Knowledge Graphs Subsets using Shape Expressions](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2110.11709/) (2021)

## Abstract (arXiv)

In constraint languages for RDF graphs, such as ShEx and SHACL, constraints on nodes and their properties in RDF graphs are known as "shapes". Schemas in these languages list the various shapes that certain targeted nodes must satisfy for the graph to conform to the schema. Using SHACL, we propose in this paper a novel use of shapes, by which a set of shapes is used to extract a subgraph from an RDF graph, the so-called shape fragment. Our proposed mechanism fits in the framework of Linked Data Fragments. In this paper, (i) we define our extraction mechanism formally, building on recently proposed SHACL formalizations; (ii) we establish correctness properties, which relate shape fragments to notions of provenance for database queries; (iii) we compare shape fragments with SPARQL queries; (iv) we discuss implementation options; and (v) we present initial experiments demonstrating that shape fragments are a feasible new idea.