Skip to main content

A Modular Approach to Scalable Ontology Development

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Book cover Canadian Semantic Web

Abstract

The increasing desire for applying semantic web techniques for describing large and complex domains demanded scalable methods for developing ontologies. Modularity is an emerging approach for developing ontologies that leads to more scalable development process and better reasoning performance. In this chapter, we describe the interface-based modular ontology formalism and its capabilities for developing scalable ontologies.We present an extension to OWL-DL as well as tool support for creating scalable ontologies through the formalism. Furthermore, we introduce a set of metrics for evaluating modular ontologies and argue how these metrics can be applied for analyzing the scalability and reasoning performance of ontologies. We investigate a number of case studies from real-world ontologies, redesign them based on the interface-based modular formalism and analyze them through the introduced metrics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Protege ontology library (2008). http://protegewiki.stanford.edu/index.php/

  2. Semantic web for earth and environmental terminology (sweet) (2008). http://sweet.jpl.nasa.gov/

  3. Travel ontology (2008). Http://protege.cim3.net/file/pub/ontologies/travel/travel.owl

    Google Scholar 

  4. Wine-food ontologies (2008). Http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-guide- 20040210/wine.rdf and http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-guide-20040210/food.rdf

  5. Ashburner, M., Ball, C.A., Blake, J.A., Botstein, D., Butler, H., Cherry, J.M., Davis, A.P., Dolinski, K., Dwight, S.S., Eppig, J.T., Harris, M.A., Hill, D.P., Issel-Tarver, L., Kasarskis, A., Lewis, S., Matese, J.C., Richardson, J.E., Ringwald, M., Rubin, G.M., Sherlock, G.: Gene ontology: tool for the unification of biology. the gene ontology consortium. Nat Genet 25(1), 25–29 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bao, J., Caragea, D., Honavar, V.: Modular ontologies - a formal investigation of semantics and expressivity. In: R. Mizoguchi, Z. Shi, F. Giunchiglia (eds.) ASWC, vol. 4185, pp. 616–631 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bao, J., Slutzki, G., Honavar, V.: A semantic importing approach to knowledge reuse from multiple ontologies. In: AAAI, pp. 1304–1309 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Borgida, A., Serafini, L.: Distributed description logics: Assimilating information from peer sources. J. Data Semantics 1, 153–184 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Burton-Jones, A., Storey, V.C., Sugumaran, V., Ahluwalia, P.: A semiotic metrics suite for assessing the quality of ontologies. Data Knowl. Eng. 55(1), 84–102 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Corcho, O., Fernandez-Lopez, M., Gomez-Perez, A.: Methodologies, tools and languages for building ontologies: where is their meeting point? Data Knowl. Eng. 46(1), 41–64 (2003). DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0169-023X((02)00195-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ding, Y., Foo, S.: Ontology research and development. part 1- a review of ontology generation. Journal of Information Science 28(2), 123–136 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ensan, F.: Formalizing ontology modularization through the notion of interfaces. In: EKAW, pp. 74–82 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Ensan, F., Du, W.: Towards domain-centric ontology development and maintenance frameworks. In: the Nineteenth International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering (SEKE), pp. 622–627 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ensan, F., Du, W.: Formalizing the role of goals in the development of domain-specific ontological frameworks. In: 41st Hawaii International International Conference on Systems Science (HICSS-41), p. 120 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Ensan, F., Du, W.: An interface-based ontology modularization framework for knowledge encapsulation. In: International Semantic Web Conference (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ensan, F., Du, W.: A knowledge encapsulation approach to ontology modularization. Knowledge and Information Systems (2009). DOI 10.1007/s10115-009-0279-y

    Google Scholar 

  17. Fernandez-Lopez, M., Gomez-Perez, A.: Overview and analysis of methodologies for building ontologies. Knowl. Eng. Rev. 17(2), 129–156 (2002). DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Gangemi, A., Catenacci, C., Ciaramita, M., Lehmann, J.: A theoretical framework for ontology evaluation and validation. In: SWAP (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Grau, B.C., Horrocks, I., Kazakov, Y., Sattler, U.: Just the right amount: extracting modules from ontologies. In: WWW ’07: Proceedings of the 16th international conference on World Wide Web, pp. 717–726. ACM, New York, NY, USA (2007). DOI http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. H., Y., A.M., O., L., E.: Cohesion metrics for ontology design and application. Journal of Computer Science 1(1), 107–113 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kalyanpur, A., Parsia, B., Sirin, E., Grau, B.C., Hendler, J.A.: Swoop: A web ontology editing browser. J. Web Sem. 4(2), 144–153 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kutz, O., Lutz, C., Wolter, F., Zakharyaschev, M.: E-connections of abstract description systems. Artif. Intell. 156(1), 1–73 (2004)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. Lefort, L., Taylor, K., Ratcliffe, D.: Towards scalable ontology engineering patterns: lessons learned from an experiment based on w3c’s part-whole guidelines. In: AOW’06: Proceedings of the second Australasian workshop on Advances in ontologies, pp. 31–40 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Maedche, A., Staab, S.: Ontology learning for the semantic web. Intelligent Systems, IEEE 16(2), 72–79 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Menken, M., Stuckenschmidt, H., Wache, H., Serafini, L., Tamilin, A., et al.: Report on modularization of ontologies. Tech. rep., The Knowledge Web Network of Excellence (NoE), Deliverable D2.1.3.1 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Navigli, R., Velardi, P.: Learning domain ontologies from document warehouses and dedicated web sites. Comput. Linguist. 30(2), 151–179 (2004). DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Noy, N.F., Musen, M.A.: The prompt suite: interactive tools for ontology merging and mapping. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 59(6), 983–1024 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Orme, A.M., Yao, H., Etzkorn, L.H.: Coupling metrics for ontology-based systems. IEEE Software 23(2), 102–108 (2006). DOI http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/MS.2006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Porzel, R., Malaka, R.: A task-based approach for ontology evaluation. In: P. Buitelaar, S. Handschuh, B. Magnini (eds.) Proceedings of ECAI 2004Workshop on Ontology Learning and Population. Valencia, Spain (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Raimond, Y., Abdallah, S., Sandler, M., Giasson, F.: The music ontology. In: International Conference on Music Information Retrieval (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Sirin, E., Parsia, B., Grau, B.C., Kalyanpur, A., Katz, Y.: Pellet: A practical owl-dl reasoner. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 5(2), 51–53 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Smith, B., Ashburner, M., Rosse, C., Bard, J., Bug, W., Ceusters, W., Goldberg, L.J., Eilbeck, K., Ireland, A., Mungall, C.J., Leontis, N., Rocca-Serra, P., Ruttenberg, A., Sansone, S.A., Scheuermann, R.H., Shah, N., Whetzel, P.L., Lewis, S.: The obo foundry: coordinated evolution of ontologies to support biomedical data integration. Nat Biotech 25(11), 1251–1255 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Song, G., Qian, Y., Liu, Y., Zhang, K.: Oasis: A mapping and integration framework for biomedical ontologies. In: CBMS ’06: Proceedings of the 19th IEEE Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems, pp. 611–616 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Wang, Y., Bao, J., Haase, P., Qi, G.: Evaluating formalisms for modular ontologies in distributed information systems. In: RR, pp. 178–193 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Zhao, G., Meersman, R.: Architecting ontology for scalability and versatility. In: OTM Conferences (2), pp. 1605–1614 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Faezeh Ensan .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer US

About this paper

Cite this paper

Ensan, F., Du, W. (2010). A Modular Approach to Scalable Ontology Development. In: Du, W., Ensan, F. (eds) Canadian Semantic Web. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-7335-1_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-7335-1_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4419-7334-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4419-7335-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics