Advertisement The Closure of 500M owl:sameAs Statements

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10843)


The owl:sameAs predicate is an essential ingredient of the Semantic Web architecture. It allows parties to independently mint names, while at the same time ensuring that these parties are able to understand each other’s data. An online resource that collects all owl:sameAs statements on the Linked Open Data Cloud has therefore both practical impact (it helps data users and providers to find different names for the same entity) as well as analytical value (it reveals important aspects of the connectivity of the LOD Cloud).

This paper presents the largest dataset of identity statements that has been gathered from the LOD Cloud to date. We describe an efficient approach for calculating and storing the full equivalence closure over this dataset. The dataset is published online, as well as a web service from which the data and its equivalence closure can be queried.


Linked Open Data Identity Reasoning 



This work was partially conducted within the MaestroGraph project (612.001.553), funded by the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO), and was partially supported by the Center for Data Science, funded by the IDEX Paris-Saclay, ANR-11-IDEX-0003-02.


  1. 1.
    Bechhofer, S., van Harmelen, F., Hendler, J., Horrocks, I., McGuinness, D.L., Patel-Schneider, P.F., Stein, A.L.: OWL web ontology language reference. Technical report, W3C, February 2004.
  2. 2.
    Beek, W., Rietveld, L., Schlobach, S.: LOD Laundromat (archival package 2016/06) (2016).
  3. 3.
    Bouquet, P., Stoermer, H., Bazzanella, B.: An entity name system (ENS) for the semantic web. In: Bechhofer, S., Hauswirth, M., Hoffmann, J., Koubarakis, M. (eds.) ESWC 2008. LNCS, vol. 5021, pp. 258–272. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). Scholar
  4. 4.
    Correndo, G., Penta, A., Gibbins, N., Shadbolt, N.: Statistical analysis of the owl:sameAs network for aligning concepts in the linking open data cloud. In: Liddle, S.W., Schewe, K.-D., Tjoa, A.M., Zhou, X. (eds.) DEXA 2012. LNCS, vol. 7447, pp. 215–230. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). Scholar
  5. 5.
    da Silva, J., Baiao, F.A., Revoredo, K.: ALIN results for OAEI 2017. In: Proceedings of the Twelfth International Workshop on Ontology Matching, OM-2017, p. 114 (2017)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ding, L., Shinavier, J., Shangguan, Z., McGuinness, D.L.: SameAs networks and beyond: analyzing deployment status and implications of owl:sameAs in linked data. In: Patel-Schneider, P.F., Pan, Y., Hitzler, P., Mika, P., Zhang, L., Pan, J.Z., Horrocks, I., Glimm, B. (eds.) ISWC 2010. LNCS, vol. 6496, pp. 145–160. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fernández, J.D., Beek, W., Martínez-Prieto, M.A., Arias, M.: LOD-a-lot. In: d’Amato, C., Fernandez, M., Tamma, V., Lecue, F., Cudré-Mauroux, P., Sequeda, J., Lange, C., Heflin, J. (eds.) ISWC 2017. LNCS, vol. 10588, pp. 75–83. Springer, Cham (2017). Scholar
  8. 8.
    Glaser, H., Jaffri, A., Millard, I.: Managing co-reference on the semantic web. In: WWW 2009 Workshop: Linked Data on the Web (LDOW 2009), April 2009Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Halpin, H., Hayes, P.J., McCusker, J.P., McGuinness, D.L., Thompson, H.S.: When owl:sameAs isn’t the same: an analysis of identity in linked data. In: Patel-Schneider, P.F., Pan, Y., Hitzler, P., Mika, P., Zhang, L., Pan, J.Z., Horrocks, I., Glimm, B. (eds.) ISWC 2010. LNCS, vol. 6496, pp. 305–320. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hogan, A., Harth, A., Passant, A., Decker, S., Polleres, A.: Weaving the pedantic web. In: Linked Data on the Web Workshop (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Horrocks, I., Patel-Schneider, P.F., van Harmelen, F.: From SHIQ and RDF to OWL: the making of a web ontology language. J. Web Semant. 1(1), 7–26 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Joshi, A.K., Jain, P., Hitzler, P., Yeh, P.Z., Verma, K., Sheth, A.P., Damova, M.: Alignment-based querying of linked open data. In: Meersman, R., et al. (eds.) OTM 2012. LNCS, vol. 7566, pp. 807–824. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). Scholar
  13. 13.
    Whitehead Jr., J.E.: Control choices and network effects in hypertext systems. In: HYPERTEXT 1999, pp. 75–82. ACM, New York (1999)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schlegel, K., Stegmaier, F., Bayerl, S., Granitzer, M., Kosch, H.: Balloon fusion: SPARQL rewriting based on unified co-reference information. In: 30th International Conference on Data Engineering Workshops, pp. 254–259, March 2014Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schmachtenberg, M., Bizer, C., Paulheim, H.: Adoption of the linked data best practices in different topical domains. In: Mika, P., et al. (eds.) ISWC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8796, pp. 245–260. Springer, Cham (2014). Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wang, X., Tiropanis, T., Davis, H.C.: Optimising linked data queries in the presence of co-reference. In: Presutti, V., d’Amato, C., Gandon, F., d’Aquin, M., Staab, S., Tordai, A. (eds.) ESWC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8465, pp. 442–456. Springer, Cham (2014). Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceVU University AmsterdamAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.UMR MIA-Paris, AgroParisTech, INRA, Paris-Saclay UniversityParisFrance
  3. 3.LRI, Paris-Sud University, CNRS 8623, Paris-Saclay UniversityOrsayFrance

Personalised recommendations