Semantic Completeness in Sub-ontology Extraction Using Distributed Methods
The use of ontologies lies at the very heart of the newly emerging era of Semantic Web. They provide a shared conceptualization of some domain that may be communicated between people and application systems. A common problem with web ontologies is that they tend to grow large in scale and complexity as a result of ever increasing information requirements. The resulting ontologies are too large to be used in their entirety by one application. Our previous work, Materialized Ontology View Extractor (MOVE), has addressed this problem by proposing a distributed architecture for the extraction/optimization of a sub-ontology from a large scale base ontology. The extraction process consists of a number of independent optimization schemes that cover various aspects of the optimization process. In this paper, we extend MOVE with a Semantic Completeness Optimization Scheme (SCOS), which addresses the issue of the semantic correctness of the resulting sub-ontology. Moreover, we utilize distributed methods to implement SCOS in a cluster environment. Here, a distributed memory architecture serves two purposes: (a). Facilitates the utilization of a cluster environment typical in business organizations, which is in line with our envisaged application of the proposed system and (b). Enhances the performance of the computationally extensive extraction process when dealing with massively sized realistic ontologies.
KeywordsParallel & Distributed Systems Semantic Web Ontologies Sub-Ontology Extraction
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Gruber, T.R.: Toward principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing. In: Formal Ontology in Conceptual Analysis and Knowledge Representation, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Deventer (1993)Google Scholar
- 2.Guarino, N., Carrara, M., Giaretta, P.: An ontology of meta-level categories. In: KR 1994: Principles of KRR, Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1994)Google Scholar
- 4.Spyns, P., Meersman, R., Mustafa, J.: Data modelling versus ontology engineering. SIGMOD (2002)Google Scholar
- 5.Guarino, N., Welty, C.: Evaluating ontological decisions with ontoclean. Communications of the ACM 45 (2002)Google Scholar
- 7.McGuinness, D.L., et al.: An environment for merging and testing large ontologies. In: Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, San Francisco, Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2000)Google Scholar
- 8.Noy, N.F., Klein, M.: Ontology evolution: Not the same as schema evolution. Technical Report SMI-2002-0926, Stanford Medical Informatics (2002)Google Scholar
- 10.Wouters, C., Dillon, T., Rahayu, W., et al.: A practical approach to the derivation of materialized ontology view. In: Web Information Systems, Idea Group Publishing, USA (2004)Google Scholar
- 11.Bhatt, M., Flahive, A., Wouters, C., Rahayu, W., Taniar, D., Dillon, T.: A Distributed Approach to Sub-Ontology Extraction. In: Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications (AINA 2004), Fukuoka, Japan (2004)Google Scholar
- 12.Gropp, W., Ewing Lusk, A.S.: Using MPI: Portable Parallel Programming with the Message-Passing Interface, 2nd edn. MIT Press, Cambridge (1999)Google Scholar