On Identifying Knowledge Processing Requirements

  • Alain Léger
  • Lyndon J. B. Nixon
  • Pavel Shvaiko
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3729)


The uptake of Semantic Web technology by industry is progressing slowly. One of the problems is that academia is not always aware of the concrete problems that arise in industry. Conversely, industry is not often well informed about the academic developments that can potentially meet its needs. In this paper we present a first step towards a successful transfer of knowledge-based technology from academia to industry. In particular, we present a collection of use cases from enterprises which are interested in Semantic Web technology. We provide a detailed analysis of the use cases, identify their technology locks, discuss the appropriateness of knowledge-based technology and possible solutions. We summarize industrial knowledge processing requirements in the form of a typology of knowledge processing tasks and a library of high level components for realizing those tasks. Eventually these results are intended to focus academia on the development of plausible knowledge-based solutions for concrete industrial problems, and therefore, facilitate the uptake of Semantic Web technology within industry.


Migration Europe Beach Editing Haas 


  1. 1.
    Rational software corporation, http://www-306.ibm.com/software/rational/
  2. 2.
    aceMedia project. Integrating knowledge, semantics and content for user centred intelligent media services, http://www.acemedia.org
  3. 3.
    Antoniou, G., Baldoni, M., Baroglio, C., Baumgartner, R., Bry, F., Eiter, T., Henze, N., Herzog, M., May, W., Patti, V., Schindlauer, R., Tompits, H., Schaffert, S.: Reasoning methods for personalization on the Semantic Web. Annals of Mathematics, Computing & Teleinformatics 2(1), 1–24 (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Benatallah, B., Hacid, M.-S., Léger, A., Rey, C., Toumani, F.: On automating web services discovery. VLDB Journal 14(1), 84–96 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Billig, A., Sandkuhl, K.: Match-making based on Semantic Nets: The XML-based approach of BaSeWeb. In: Proceedings of the workshop on XML-Technologien für das Semantic Web, pp. 39–51 (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Booch, G., Rumbaugh, J., Jacobson, I.: The Unified Modeling Language User Guide. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1997)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dhamankar, R., Lee, Y., Doan, A., Halevy, A., Domingos, P.: iMAP: Discovering complex semantic matches between database schemas. In: Proceedings of SIGMOD (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Di Noia, T., Di Sciascio, E., Donini, F.M., Mongiello, M.: A system for principled matchmaking in an electronic marketplace. In: Proceedings of WWW, pp. 321–330 (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dou, D., McDermott, D., Qi, P.: Ontology translation on the Semantic Web. Journal on Data Semantics II, 35–57 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Euzenat, J., Valtchev, P.: Similarity-based ontology alignment in OWL-lite. In: Proceedings of ECAI, pp. 333–337 (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Giunchiglia, F., Shvaiko, P.: Semantic matching. The Knowledge Engineering Review Journal 18(3), 265–280 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Giunchiglia, F., Shvaiko, P., Yatskevich, M.: Semantic schema matching. In: Proceedings of CoopIS (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Haarslev, V., Moller, R., Wessel, M.: RACER: Semantic middleware for industrial projects based on RDF/OWL, a W3C Standard, http://www.sts.tu-harburg.de/r.f.moeller/racer/
  14. 14.
    Stanford Medical Informatics. Protégé ontology editor and knowldege aquisition system, http://protege.stanford.edu/index.html
  15. 15.
    Jacobson, I., Booch, G., Rumbaugh, J. (eds.): The unified software development process. Addisson-Wesley, London (1999)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lenzerini, M.: Data integration: A theoretical perspective. In: Proceeding of PODS, pp. 233–246 (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    McGuinness, D.L., Fikes, R., Rice, J., Wilder, S.: An environment for merging and testing large ontologies. In: Proceedings of KR, pp. 483–493 (2000)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mena, E., Kashyap, V., Sheth, A., Illarramendi, A.: OBSERVER: An approach for query processing in global information systems based on interoperability between pre-existing ontologies. In: Proceedings of CoopIS, pp. 14–25 (1996)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nixon, L., Mochol, M., Léger, A., Paulus, F., Rocuet, L., Bonifacio, M., Cuel, R., Jarrar, M., Verheyden, P., Kompatsiaris, Y., Papastathis, V., Dasiopoulou, S., Gómez Pérez, A.: D1.1.2 Prototypical Business Use Cases. Technical report, Knowledge Web NoE (2004)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Noy, N., Musen, M.: PROMPT: Algorithm and tool for automated ontology merging and alignment. In: Proceedings of AAAI, pp. 450–455 (2000)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Petrini, J., Risch, T.: Processing queries over RDF views of wrapped relational databases. In: Proceedings of the workshop on Wrapper Techniques for Legacy Systems (2004)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Preguica, N., Shapiro, M., Matheson, C.: Semantics-based reconciliation for collaborative and mobile environments. In: Proccedings of CoopIS, pp. 38–55 (2003)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rahm, E., Bernstein, P.: A survey of approaches to automatic schema matching. VLDB Journal 10(4), 334–350 (2001)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Shvaiko, P., Euzenat, J.: A survey of schema-based matching approaches. Journal on Data Semantics IV (2005)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Shvaiko, P., Giunchiglia, F., Pinheiro da Silva, P., McGuinness, D.L.: Web explanations for semantic heterogeneity discovery. In: Gómez-Pérez, A., Euzenat, J. (eds.) ESWC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3532, pp. 303–317. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Shvaiko, P., Léger, A., Paulus, F., Rocuet, L., Nixon, L., Mochol, M., Kompatsiaris, Y., Papastathis, V., Dasiopoulou, S.: D1.1.3 Knowledge Processing Requirements Analysis. Technical report, Knowledge Web NoE (2004)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Traverso, P., Pistore, M.: Automated composition of semantic web services into executable processes. In: Proceedings of ISWC, pp. 380–394 (2004)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Velegrakis, Y., Miller, R.J., Mylopoulos, J.: Representing and querying data transformations. In: Proceedings of ICDE, pp. 81–92 (2005)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Yan, L., Miller, R., Haas, L., Fagin, R.: Data driven understanding and refinement of schema mappings. SIGMOD Record 30(2), 485–496 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Zhong, J., Zhu, H., Li, J., Yu, Y.: Conceptual graph matching for semantic search. In: Proceedings of the ICCS, pp. 92–106 (2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alain Léger
    • 1
  • Lyndon J. B. Nixon
    • 2
  • Pavel Shvaiko
    • 3
  1. 1.France Telecom R&DRennesFrance
  2. 2.Free University of BerlinBerlinGermany
  3. 3.University of TrentoPovo, TrentoItaly

Personalised recommendations