Study on Integrating Semantic Applications with Magpie

  • Martin Dzbor
  • Enrico Motta
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4183)


This paper describes two approaches to integrating standalone information processing techniques into a semantic application capable of acquiring and maintaining knowledge, which we conducted using our open Semantic Web framework of Magpie. We distinguish between integration through aggregation and through choreographing, and argue that the latter is not only simpler to realize but also provides greater benefits. The benefits were, in our experiment, related to developing a capability of maintaining and validating knowledge through an integration of down- and upstream knowledge processing tools. We describe the principles of integration and relate them to pragmatic challenges for the semantic web and to strategic directions of its evolution.


Knowledge Processing Knowledge Engineer Semantic Service Semantic Application Ontology Population 
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.
    Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, J., Lassila, O.: The Semantic Web. Scientific American 279(5), 34–43 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cimiano, P., Ladwig, G., Staab, S.: Gimme’ the Context: Context-driven Automatic Semantic Annotation with C-PANKOW. In: 14th Intl. WWW Conf., Japan (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ciravegna, F., Dingli, A., Guthrie, D., et al.: Integrating Information to Bootstrap Information Extraction from Web Sites. In: IJCAI Workshop on Information Integration on the Web, Mexico (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cunningham, H., Maynard, D., Bontcheva, K., et al.: GATE: A Framework and Graphical Development Environment for Robust NLP Tools and Applications. In: 40th Anniversary Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), Pennsylvania, US (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dill, S., Eiron, N., Gibson, D., et al.: SemTag and Seeker: bootstrapping the semantic web via automated semantic annotation. In: Proc. of the 12th Intl. WWW Conf., pp. 178–186. ACM Press, Hungary (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dzbor, M., Domingue, J., Motta, E.: Magpie – towards a semantic web browser. In: Fensel, D., Sycara, K.P., Mylopoulos, J. (eds.) ISWC 2003. LNCS, vol. 2870, pp. 690–705. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dzbor, M., Motta, E., Domingue, J.: Opening up magpie via semantic services. In: McIlraith, S.A., Plexousakis, D., van Harmelen, F. (eds.) ISWC 2004. LNCS, vol. 3298, pp. 635–649. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Etzioni, O., Cafarella, M., Downey, D., et al.: Methods for domain-independent information extraction from the web: An experimental comparison. In: Proc. of the 19th AAAI Conf., California, US, pp. 391–398 (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ferrucci, D., Lally, A.: Building an example application with the Unstructured Information Management Architecture. IBM Systems Journal 43(3), 455–475 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gennari, J., Musen, M.A., Fergerson, R., et al.: The evolution of Protege-2000: An environment for knowledge-based systems development. Intl. Journal of Human-Computer Studies 58(1), 89–123 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Grudin, J.: Groupware and Social Dynamics: Eight Challenges for Developers. Communications of the ACM 37(1), 92–105 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Heath, T., Motta, E., Petre, M.: Person to Person Trust Factors in Word of Mouth Recommendation. In: CHI 2006 Workshop on Reinventing Trust, Collaboration, and Compliance in Social Systems (Reinvent 2006), Montreal, Canada (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kahan, J., Koivunen, M.-R., Prud’Hommeaux, E., et al.: Annotea: An Open RDF Infrastructure for Shared Web Annotations. In: 10th Intl. WWW Conf., Hong-Kong (2001)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kalfoglou, Y., Alani, H., Schorlemmer, W.M., Walton, C.: On the emergent semantic web and overlooked issues. In: McIlraith, S.A., Plexousakis, D., van Harmelen, F. (eds.) ISWC 2004. LNCS, vol. 3298, pp. 576–590. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Motik, B., Sattler, U.: Practical DL Reasoning over Large ABoxes with KAON2 (2006)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Peltz, C.: Web Services Orchestration & Choreography. Web Services Journal 3(7) (2003)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Popov, B., Kiryakov, A., Kirilov, A., Manov, D., Ognyanoff, D., Goranov, M.: KIM – semantic annotation platform. In: Fensel, D., Sycara, K.P., Mylopoulos, J. (eds.) ISWC 2003. LNCS, vol. 2870, pp. 834–849. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Quan, D., Huynh, D.F., Karger, D.R.: Haystack: A platform for authoring end user semantic web applications. In: Fensel, D., Sycara, K.P., Mylopoulos, J. (eds.) ISWC 2003. LNCS, vol. 2870, pp. 738–753. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Takeda, H., Ohmukai, I.: Building semantic web applications as information sharing systems. In: UserSWeb: Wksp. on User Aspects of the Semantic Web, Crete (2005)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Uren, V.S., Cimiano, P., Motta, E., et al.: Browsing for Information by Highlighting Automatically Generated Annotations: User Study and Evaluation. In: Proc. of the 3rd Knowledge Capture Conf., Canada, pp. 75–82 (2005)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zhu, H., Siegel, M.D., Madnick, S.E.: Information Aggregation – A Value-added e-Service. In: Proc. of the Intl. Conference on Technology, Policy and Innovation, The Netherlands (2001)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin Dzbor
    • 1
  • Enrico Motta
    • 1
  1. 1.Knowledge Media Institute, Computing Research CentreThe Open UniversityUK

Personalised recommendations