The VLDB Journal

, Volume 12, Issue 4, pp 286–302 | Cite as

Managing multiple and distributed ontologies on the Semantic Web

Abstract.

In traditional software systems, significant attention is devoted to keeping modules well separated and coherent with respect to functionality, thus ensuring that changes in the system are localized to a handful of modules. Reuse is seen as the key method in reaching that goal. Ontology-based systems on the Semantic Web are just a special class of software systems, so the same principles apply. In this article, we present an integrated framework for managing multiple and distributed ontologies on the Semant ic Web. It is based on the representation model for ontologies, trading off between expressivity and tractability. In our framework, we provide features for reusing existing ontologies and for evolving them while retaining the consistency. The approach is implemented within KAON, the Karlsruhe Ontology and Semantic Web tool suite.

Keywords:

Multiple and distributed ontologies Ontology evolution 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Banerjee J, Kim W, Kim H, Korth H (1987) Semantics and implementation of schema evolution in object-oriented databases. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD annual conference on management of data, San Francisco, May 1987, 16(3):311-322Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bechhofer S, Goble C, Horrocks I (2001) DAML+OIL is not enough. In: Proceedings of the SWWS-1, Semantic Web working symposium, Stanford, CA, 29 July-1 August 2001, pp 151-159Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Beeri C, Ramakrishnan R (1987) On the power of magic. In: Proceedings of the 6th ACM symposium on principles of database systems, San Diego, March 1987, pp 269-284Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bhide M, Deoasee P, Katkar A, Panchbudhe A, Ramamritham K (2002) Adaptive push-pull: disseminating dynamic Web data. IEEE Trans Comput 51(6):652-668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Borgida A (1992) Description logics are not just for the FLIGHTLESS-BIRDS: a new look at the utility and foundations of description logics. Technical Report DCS-TR-295, Department of Computer Science, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen W, Kifer M, Warren DS (1993) HiLog: a foundation for higher-order logic programming. J Logic Programm 15:187-230CrossRefMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Connolly D, van Harmelen F, Horrocks I, McGuinness DL, Patel-Schneider PF, Stein LA (2001) DAML+OIL (March 2001) Reference Description, http://www.w3.org/TR/daml+oil-referenceGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cranefield S, Purvis M (1999) UML as an ontology modelling language. In: Proceedings of the workshop on intelligent information integration, 16th international joint conference on artificial intelligence (IJCAI-99), Stockholm, July 1999, pp 46-53 http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/ ley/db/conf/ijcai/ ijcai99iii.html#CranefieldP99Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dean M, Connolly D, van Harmelen F, Hendler J, Horrocks I, McGuinness DL, Patel-Schneider PF, Stein LA (2002) OWL Web Ontology Language 1.0 Reference, W3C Working Draft 29 July 2002 http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Farquhar A, Fikes R, Rice J (1997) Tools for assembling modular ontologies in Ontolingua. In: Proceedings of the 14th national conference on artificial intelligence (AAAI-97), Menlo Park, CA, July 1997, pp 436-441Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Farquhar A, Fikes R, Rice J (1996) The Ontolingua server: tools for collaborative ontology construction. Technical report, Stanford KSL 96-26, September 1996Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fensel D, Horrocks I, van Harmelen F, Decker S, Erdmann M, Klein M (2000) OIL in a nutshell. In: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on knowledge engineering and knowledge management (EKAW-2000), Juan-les-Pins, France, October 2000, pp 1-16Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Heflin J (2001) Towards the Semantic Web: knowledge representation in a dynamic, distributed environment. PhD thesis, University of Maryland, College ParkGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Heflin J, Hendler JA (2000) Dynamic ontologies on the Web. In: Proceedings of the 7th national conference on artificial intelligence AAAI-2000, Menlo Park, CA, August 2000, pp 443-449. AAAI/MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kifer M, Lausen G, Wu J (1995) Logical foundations of object-oriented and frame-based languages. J ACM 42:741-843CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Klein M, Kiryakov A, Ognyanov D, Fensel D (2002) Ontology versioning and change detection on the Web. In: Proceedings of the 13th European conference on knowledge engineering and knowledge management (EKAW-2002), Siguenza, Spain, October 2002, pp 197-212Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Maedche A, Motik B, Silva N, Volz R (2002) MAFRA - an ontology MApping FRAmework in the context of the Semantic Web. In: Proceedings of the workshop on ontology transformation at ECAI - 2002, Lyon, France, July 2002Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Maedche A, Motik B, Stojanovic L, Studer R, Volz R (2003) Ontologies for enterprise knowledge management. IEEE Intell Sys (in press)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    McGuinness D (2000) Conceptual modeling for distributed ontology environments. In: Proceedings of the 8th international conference on conceptual structures logical, linguistic, and computational issues (ICCS 2000), Darmstadt, Germany, August 2000, pp 100-112Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Menzis T (1998) Knowledge maintenance: the state of the art. Knowledge Eng Rev 10(2):1-46Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Meyer B (1997) Object-oriented software construction, 2nd edn. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Noy NF, Fergerson RW, Musen MA (2000) The knowledge model of protege-2000: combining interoperability and flexibility. In: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on knowledge engineering and knowledge management (EKAW-2000), Juan-les-Pins, France, October 2000, pp 17-32Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Noy NF, Klein M (2002) Ontology evolution: not the same as schema evolution. Technical Report SMI-2002-0926, Stanford Medical Informatics, Stanford UniversityGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Oliver DE, Shahar Y, Musen MA, Shortliffe EH (1999) Representation of change in controlled medical terminologies. AI in Medicine 15(1):53-76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ozsu MT, Valduriez P (1999) Principles of distributed database systems. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pan J, Horrocks I (2001) Metamodeling architecture of web ontology languages. In: Proceedings of the Semantic Web working symposium, Stanford University, July 2001, pp 131-149Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Pierre G, van Steen M (2002) Dynamicaly selecting optimal distribution strategies on Web documents. IEEE Trans Comput 51(6): 637-651CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Roddick JF (1996) A survey of schema versioning issues for database systems. Inform Software Technol 37(7):383-393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Stojanovic L, Maedche A, Motik B, Stojanovic N (2002) User-driven ontology evolution management. In: Proceedings of the 13th European conference on knowledge engineering and knowledge management (EKAW-2002), Siguenza, Spain, October 2002, pp 285-300Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tallis M, Gil Y (1999) Designing scripts to guide users in modifying knowledge-based systems. In: Poceedings of the 14th National Conferebce on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-99), Orlando, July 1999, pp 242-249Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Welty CA, Ferrucci DA (1994) What’s in an instance? Technical report, RPI Computer Science, Troy, NYGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wörner M, Breche P (1995) How to remove a class in an ODBS. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on applications of databases (ADB-95), Santa Clara, December 1995, pp 235-248Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin/Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.QI/EBI2, eBusiness Applikationen, Informationsmanagement, Business IntelligenceRobert Bosch GmbH
  2. 2.Forschungszentrum Informatik (FZI)University of KarlsruheKarlsruheGermany

Personalised recommendations