User-Driven Ontology Evolution Management

  • Ljiljana Stojanovic
  • Alexander Maedche
  • Boris Motik
  • Nenad Stojanovic
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2473)


With rising importance of knowledge interchange, many industrial and academic applications have adopted ontologies as their conceptual backbone. However, industrial and academic environments are very dynamic, thus inducing changes to application requirements. To fulfill these changes, often the underlying ontology must be evolved as well. As ontologies grow in size, the complexity of change management increases, thus requiring a well-structured ontology evolution process. In this paper we identify a possible six-phase evolution process and focus on providing the user with capabilities to control and customize it. We introduce the concept of an evolution strategy encapsulating policy for evolution with respect to user’s requirements.


Consistent State Concept Hierarchy Elementary Change Resolution Point Dependent Ontology 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    J. Banerjee, W. Kim, H.J. Kim, H. Korth, Semantics and implementation of schema evolution in object-oriented databases, In proceedings of the Annual Conference on Management of Data, pp-211–322, ACM SIGMOD, May 1997.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    T. Berners-Lee, XML 2000-Semantic Web talk, 2000,, 2000.
  3. 3.
    P. Breche, M. Wörner, How to remove a class in an ODBS, In ADBS’95, 2nd International Conference on Application Database, Santa Clara, California, 1995Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. Bultman, J. Kuipers and F. van Harmelen, Maintenance of KBS’s by domain experts: The Holy Grail in Practice, Lecture Notes in AI, IEA/AIE’00, 2000.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    S. Decker, M. Erdmann, D. Fensel and R. Studer, Ontobroker: Ontology based access to distributed and semi-structured information, Meersman, R. et al. (Eds.), Database Semantics: Semantic Issues in Multimedia Systems, pp. 351–369. Kluwer Academic Publisher, 1999.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    D. Fensel, Ontologies: Dynamics Networks of Meaning, In Proceedings of the the 1st Semantic web working symposium, Stanford, CA, USA, July 30th-August 1st, 2001.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    E. Franconi, F. Grandi, and F. Mandreoli, A semantic approach for schema evolution and versioning in object-oriented databases, Proc. CL2000, 2000.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. Gomez-Perez, Ontological engineering: A state of the art, Expert Update, 2(3):33–43, Autumn 1999.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    J. Heflin, Towards the Semantic Web: Knowledge Representation in a Dynamic, Distributed Environment, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Maryland, College Park. 2001.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    W. Hürsch, Maintaining consistency and behaviour of object-oriented systems during evolution, In Proc. of the ACM Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages and Applications (OOPSLA’ 97), Vol. 32 No. 10, pp1–21, 1997.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    M. Klein and D. Fensel, Ontology versioning for the Semantic Web, Proc. International Semantic Web Working Symposium, USA, July 30–August 1, 2001.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    A. Maedche and S. Staab, Ontology Learning for the Semantic Web, IEEE Intelligent Systems, 16(2), March/April 2001. Special Issue on Semantic Web, 2001.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    A. Maedche, L. Stojanovic, R. Studer, R. Volz: Managing Multiple Ontologies and Ontology Evolution in Ontologging, In Proceedings of the Conference on Intelligent Information Processing, World Computer Congress 2002, Montreal, Canada, 2002.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    A. Maedche, M. Ehrig, S. Handschuh, L. Stojanovic, R. Volz, Ontology-Focused Crawling on Documents and Relational Metadata, In Proceedings of the Eleventh International World Wide Web Conference WWW-2002, (Poster), Hawaii, 2002.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    T. Menzis, Knowledge maintenance: The state of the art. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 10(2), 1998.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    D. McGuinness, Conceptual Modeling for Distributed Ontology Environments, In the Proceedings of the ICCS 2000, August 14–18, Darmstadt, Germany, 2000.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    D. McGuinness, R. Fikes, J. Rice, and S. Wilder, An environment for merging and testing large ontologies, In Proceedings of KR-2000. principle of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. Morgan-Kaufman, 2000.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    N. F. Noy, M. Klein, Ontology Evolution: Not the Same as Schema Evolution, SMI technical report SMI-2002-0926, 2002.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    N. F. Noy, D. McGuinness, Ontology Development 101: A Guide to creating your first Ontology, Stanford Knowledge Systems Laboratory Technical Report KSL-01-05 and Stanford Medical Informatics Technical Report SMI-2001-0880, March 2001Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    D. E. Oliver, Y. Shahar, M. A. Musen, and E. H. Shortliffe, Representation of change in controlled medical terminologies, AI in Medicine, 15(1):53–76, 1999.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    J.F. Roddick, A Survey of Schema Versioning Issues for Database Systems, Information and Software Technology, 37(7):383–393, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    S. Staab, H.-P. Schnurr, R. Studer and Y. Sure, Knowledge Processes and Ontologies, IEEE Intelligent Systems. 16(1), Jan./Feb. 2001. Special Issue on Knowledge Management, 2001.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    L. Stojanovic, N. Stojanovic and R. Volz, Migrating data-intensive Web Sites into the Semantic Web, In Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Applied Computing SAC, 2002.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    L. Stojanovic, N. Stojanovic, S. Handschuh, Evolution of the Metadata in the Ontology-based Knowledge Management Systems, In Proceedings of Experience Management 2002, Berlin, 2002.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    N. Stojanovic, A. Maedche, S. Staab, R. Studer and Y. Sure, SEAL — A Framework for Developing SEmantic PortALs, ACM K-CAP 2001. October, Vancouver, 2001.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    N. Stojanovic, L. Stojanovic, Searching for the Knowledge in the Semantic Web, The 15th International FLAIRS Conference, Pensacola, Florida, May 14–16, 2002.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    N. Stojanovic, L. Stojanovic: Evolution in the ontology-based knowledge management system. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Systems-ECIS 2002, Gdañsk, Poland, 2002.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    M. Tallis, Y. Gil, Designing Scripts to Guide Users in Modifying Knowledge-based Systems, AAAI/IAAI 1999: 242–249Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    V.A.M. Tamma, T.J.M Bench-Capon, A conceptual model to facilitate knowledge sharing in multi-agent systems, In Proceedings of the OAS 2001. Montreal, pp. 69–76, 2001.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ljiljana Stojanovic
    • 1
  • Alexander Maedche
    • 1
  • Boris Motik
    • 1
  • Nenad Stojanovic
    • 2
  1. 1.FZI - Research Center for Information Technologies at the University of KarlsruheKarlsruheGermany
  2. 2.Institute AIFBUniversity of KarlsruheKarlsruheGermany

Personalised recommendations