Roadmapping and Navigating in the Ontology Visualization Landscape

  • Marek Dudáš
  • Ondřej Zamazal
  • Vojtěch Svátek
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8876)


Proper visualization is essential for ontology development, sharing and usage; various use cases however pose specific requirements on visualization features. We analyzed several visualization tools from the perspective of use case categories as well as low-level functional features and OWL expressiveness. A rule-based recommender was subsequently developed to help the user choose a suitable visualizer. Both the analysis results and the recommender were evaluated via a questionnaire.


Visualization Tool Ontology Development Suitability Score Compositional Rule Datatype Property 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Alani, H.: TGVizTab: An ontology visualisation extension for Protege. In: K-CAP 2003 Workshop on Visualization Information in Knowledge Engineering (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bardzins, J., et al.: OWLGrEd: A UML Style Graphical Editor for OWL. In: Ontology Repositories and Editors for the Semantic Web, Hersonissos (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Berka, P.: NEST: A Compositional Approach to Rule-Based and Case-Based Reasoning. In: Advances in Artificial Intelligence, 15 p. (2011),
  4. 4.
    Brockmans, S., Volz, R., Eberhart, A., Löffler, P.: Visual modeling of OWL DL ontologies using UML. In: McIlraith, S.A., Plexousakis, D., van Harmelen, F. (eds.) ISWC 2004. LNCS, vol. 3298, pp. 198–213. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Da Silva, I.C.S., Freitas, C.M.D.S., Santucci, G.: An integrated approach for evaluating the visualization of intensional and extensional levels of ontologies. In: Proceedings of the 2012 BELIV Workshop: Beyond Time and Errors-Novel Evaluation Methods for Visualization, p. 2. ACM (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ernst, N.A., Storey, M.-A.: A Preliminary Analysis of Visualization Requirements in Knowledge Engineering Tools. University of Victoria (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Freitas, C.M.D.S., et al.: On evaluating information visualization techniques. In: Proceedings of the Working Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces, pp. 373–374. ACM, New York (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hajek, P.: Combining functions for certainty degrees in consulting systems. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 22(1), 59–76 (1985)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Herman, I., Melanon, G., Marshal, M.S.: Graph visualization and navigation in information visualization: A survey. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 6(1), 24–43 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hop, W., et al.: Using Hierarchical Edge Bundles to visualize complex ontologies in GLOW. In: Proceedings of the 27th Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, pp. 304–311. ACM (2012)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Howse, J., Stapleton, G., Taylor, K., Chapman, P.: Visualizing ontologies: A case study. In: Aroyo, L., Welty, C., Alani, H., Taylor, J., Bernstein, A., Kagal, L., Noy, N., Blomqvist, E. (eds.) ISWC 2011, Part I. LNCS, vol. 7031, pp. 257–272. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Katifori, A., et al.: A comparative study of four ontology visualization techniques in protege: Experiment setup and preliminary results. In: IEEE Information Visualization 2006, pp. 417–423 (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Katifori, A., et al.: Ontology visualization methods – a survey. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 39(4), 10 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kendall, E.F., Bell, R., Burkhart, R., Dutra, M., Wallace, E.K.: Towards a Graphical Notation for OWL 2. In: OWLED 2009 (2009)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Motta, E., Mulholland, P., Peroni, S., d’Aquin, M., Gomez-Perez, J.M., Mendez, V., Zablith, F.: A novel approach to visualizing and navigating ontologies. In: Aroyo, L., Welty, C., Alani, H., Taylor, J., Bernstein, A., Kagal, L., Noy, N., Blomqvist, E. (eds.) ISWC 2011, Part I. LNCS, vol. 7031, pp. 470–486. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Parreiras, F.S., Walter, T., Gröner, G.: Visualizing ontologies with UML-like notation. In: Ontology-Driven Software Engineering. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rene Robin, C.R., Uma, G.V.: Development of educational ontology for software risk analysis. In: Proceedings of the 2011 International Conference on Communication, Computing & Security, ICCCS 2011, pp. 610-615. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sarkar, M., Brown, M.H.: Graphical fisheye views of graphs. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 83–91. ACM (June 1992)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shneiderman, B.: The eyes have it: A task by data type taxonomy for information visualizations. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages, pp. 336–343. IEEE (1996)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sivakumar, R., Arivoli, P.V.: Ontology Visualization Protege Tools: A Review. International Journal of Advanced Information Technology 1(4) (2011),
  21. 21.
    Storey, M., et al.: Jambalaya: Interactive visualization to enhance ontology authoring and knowledge acquisition in Protégé. In: Workshop on Interactive Tools for Knowledge Capture, K-CAP-2001 (2001)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Swaminathan, V., Sivakumar, R.: A Comparative Study of Recent Ontology Visualization Tools With a Case of Diabetes Data. International Journal of Research in Computer Science 2(3), 31 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Weidong, H. (ed.): Handbook of Human Centric Visualization. Springer (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marek Dudáš
    • 1
  • Ondřej Zamazal
    • 1
  • Vojtěch Svátek
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Information and Knowledge EngineeringUniversity of EconomicsPrague 3Czech Republic

Personalised recommendations