Advertisement

A Novel Memory-Oriented OWL Storage System

  • Dongwon Jeong
  • Myounghoi Choi
  • Yang-Seung Jeon
  • Youn-Hee Han
  • Young-Sik Jeong
  • Sung-Kook Han
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4331)

Abstract

A novel memory-oriented OWL storage system is proposed. Semantic Web is recognized as the next generation Web and OWL (Web Ontology Language) is one of the most important technologies to achieve the Semantic Web. Even though several memory-oriented storage systems have been proposed to manage and handle OWL documents, they still suffer from low performance. In this paper, we propose a new memory-based OWL storage system to resolve the problem. This paper describes the proposed storage model and shows the experiment and comparison result. The evaluation result shows our storage system provides higher performance than other systems. Therefore, it enables us to develop and provides high quality Semantic Web services.

Keywords

Storage System Resource Description Framework Description Logic Storage Model Comparative Item 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Yergeau, F., Cowan, J., Bray, T., Paoli, J., Sperberg-McQueen, C.M., Maler, E.: Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.1, W3C Recommendation, February 4 (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Resource Description Framework (RDF), http://www.w3.org/RDF/
  3. 3.
    Dave Bechett, RDF/XML Syntax Specification (Revised), W3C Recommendation, February 10 (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Connolly, D., van Harmelen, F., Horrocks, I., McGuinness, D.L., Patel-Schneider, P.F., Stein, L.A.: DAML+OIL Reference Description. W3C Note, December 18 (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Smith, M.K., Welty, C., McGuinness, D.L. (eds.): OWL Web Ontology Language Guide, W3C Recommendation, February 10 (2004), http://www.w2.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-guide-20040210/
  6. 6.
    del Mar Roldan-Garcia, M., Aldana-Montes, J.F.: A Tool for Storing OWL Using Database Technology (November 2005)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pan, Z., Heflin, J.: DLDB: Extending Relational Databases to Support Semantic Web Queries. In: Workshop on Practical and Scaleable Semantic Web Systems, The 2nd International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2003) (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Broekstra, J., Kampman, A.: Sesame: A Generic Architecture for Storing and Querying RDF and RDF Schema. In: Horrocks, I., Hendler, J. (eds.) ISWC 2002. LNCS, vol. 2342, Springer, Heidelberg (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    OWLJessKB: A Semantic Web Reasoning Tool, http://edge.cs.drexel.edu/assemblies/software/owljesskb/
  10. 10.
    Grosof, B.N., Horrocks, I., Volz, R., Decker, S.: Description Logic Programms: Combining Logic Programms with Description Logic. In: Proceedings of the 12th international World Wide Web Conference (2003)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Horrocks, I., Li, L., Turi, D., Bechhofer, S.: The Instance Store: Description Logic Reasoning with Large Numbers of Individuals (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    SourceForge.net, Jena2 Database Interface - Database Layout (November 2004), http://jena.sourceforge.net/DB/layout.html
  13. 13.
    Jena: A Semantic Web Framework for Java, http://jena.sourceforge.net/
  14. 14.
    Jess: A Rule Engine for the Java Platform, http://herzberg.ca.sandia.gov/jess/
  15. 15.
    Gensereth, M., Fikes, R.: Knowledge Interchange Format, Stanford Logic Report Logic, Stanford University, http://logic.stanford.edu/kif/kif.html
  16. 16.
    Karvounarakis, G., Magkanaraki, A., Alexaki, S., Christophides, V., Plexousakis, D., Scholl, M., Tolle, K.: Querying the Semantic Web with RQL, Elsevier Science. Computer Networks and ISDN Systems Journal 42(5), 617–640 (2003)MATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Eric Prud’hommeaux and Andy Seaborne, SPARQL Query Language for RDF, W3C Candidate Recommendation, April 6 (2006) Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Carroll, J.J., De Roo, J.: OWL Web Ontology Language Test Cases. W3C Recommendation (February 10, 2004)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Guo, Y.: Data Generator(UBA): UBA1.7, http://swat.cse.lehigh.edu/projects/lubm/
  20. 20.
    Guo, Y., Pan, Z., Heflin, J.: An Evaluation of Knowledge Base Systems for Large OWL Datasets. In: McIlraith, S.A., Plexousakis, D., van Harmelen, F. (eds.) ISWC 2004. LNCS, vol. 3298, pp. 274–288. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Guo, Y., Pan, Z., Heflin, J.: LUBM: A Benchmark for OWL Knowledge Base Systems. Journal of Web Semantics (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dongwon Jeong
    • 1
  • Myounghoi Choi
    • 1
  • Yang-Seung Jeon
    • 3
  • Youn-Hee Han
    • 2
  • Young-Sik Jeong
    • 3
  • Sung-Kook Han
    • 3
  1. 1.Dept. of Informatics and StatisticsKunsan National UniversityGunsanKorea
  2. 2.School of Internet-MediaKorea University of Technology and EducationCheonan, ChungnamKorea
  3. 3.Dept. of Computer EngineeringWonkwang UniversityIksan, Jeollabuk-doKorea

Personalised recommendations