Who the Heck Is the Father of Bob?

A Survey of the OWL Reasoning Infrastructure for Expressive Real-World Applications
  • Marko Luther
  • Thorsten Liebig
  • Sebastian Böhm
  • Olaf Noppens
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5554)


Finding the optimal selection of an OWL reasoner and service interface for a specific ontology-based application is challenging. Over time it has become more and more difficult to match application requirements with service offerings from available reasoning engines, in particular with recent optimizations for certain reasoning services and new reasoning algorithms for different fragments of OWL. This work is motivated by real-world experiences and reports about interesting findings in the course of developing an ontology-based application. Benchmarking outcomes of several reasoning engines are discussed – especially with respect to accompanying sound and completeness tests. We compare the performance of various service and communication protocols in different computing environments. Hereby, it becomes apparent that these largely underrated components may have an enormous impact on the overall performance.


Description Logic Object Property Conjunctive Query Benchmark Suite Query Answering 
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.


  1. 1.
    Grau, B.C., Horrocks, I., Motik, B., Parsia, B., Patel-Schneider, P., Sattler, U.: OWL 2: The next step for OWL. In: Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web, vol. 6, pp. 309–322 (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Liebig, T.: Reasoning with OWL: System Support and Insights. Technical Report TR-2006-04, Ulm University, Germany (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Weithöner, T., Liebig, T., Luther, M., Böhm, S., von Henke, F.W., Noppens, O.: Real-world reasoning with OWL. In: Franconi, E., Kifer, M., May, W. (eds.) ESWC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4519, pp. 296–310. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ma, L., Yang, Y., Qiu, Z., Xie, G., Pan, Y., Liu, S.: Towards a Complete OWL Ontology Benchmark. In: Sure, Y., Domingue, J. (eds.) ESWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4011, pp. 125–139. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    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
  6. 6.
    Horrocks, I.: Using an expressive description logic: FaCT or fiction? In: Proc. of the 6th Int. Conf. on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR 1998), June 1998, pp. 636–647 (1998)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sirin, E., Parsia, B., Grau, B.C., Kalyanpur, A., Katz, Y.: Pellet: A practical OWL-DL reasoner. Journal of Web Semantics 5, 51–53 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Haarslev, V., Möller, R.: Description of the RACER system and its applications. In: Proc. of the Int. Workshop on Description Logics (2001)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shearer, R., Motik, B., Horrocks, I.: HermiT: A Highly-Efficient OWL Reasoner. In: Proc. of the OWL Experiences and Directions Workshop at the ISWC 2008 (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dolby, J., Fokoue, A., Kalyanpur, A., Ma, L., Schonberg, E., Srinivas, K., Sun, X.: Scalable conjunctive query evaluation over large and expressive knowledge bases. Technical report, IBM Watson Research Center (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lin, H., Sirin, E.: Pellint – A Performance Lint Tool for Pellet. In: Proc. of the OWL Experiences and Directions Workshop at the ISWC 2008 (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Böhm, S., Koolwaaij, J., Luther, M., Souville, B., Wagner, M., Wibbels, M.: Introducing IYOUIT. In: Int. Semantic Web Conf. (ISWC 2008). LNCS, vol. 5318, pp. 804–817. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Horridge, M., Bechhofer, S., Noppens, O.: The OWL API. In: Proc. of the 3rd OWL Experiences and Directions Workshop at the ESWC 2007 (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Liebig, T., Luther, M., Noppens, O., Rodriguez, M., Calvanese, D., Wessel, M., Horridge, M., Bechhofer, S., Tsarkov, D., Sirin, E.: OWLlink: DIG for OWL 2. In: Proc. of the OWL Experiences and Directions Workshop at the ISWC 2008 (2008)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Luther, M., Fukazawa, Y., Wagner, M., Kurakake, S.: Situational reasoning for task-oriented mobile service recommendation. The Knowledge Engineering Review 23, 7–19 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pan, F., Hobbs, J.: Time in OWL-S. In: Proceedings of the AAAI Spring Symposium on Semantic Web Services, California, Stanford University, pp. 29–36 (2004)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gardiner, T., Horrocks, I., Tsarkov, D.: Automated Benchmarking of Description Logic Reasoners. In: Parsia, B., Sattler, U., Toman, D. (eds.) Proc. of the Int. Workshop on Description Logics (DL 2006), vol. 189, pp. 167–174. (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Halaschek-Wiener, C., Parsia, B., Sirin, E.: Description logic reasoning with syntactic updates. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) OTM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4275, pp. 722–737. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Grau, B.C., Halaschek-Wiener, C., Kazakov, Y.: History matters: Incremental ontology reasoning using modules. In: Aberer, K., Choi, K.-S., Noy, N., Allemang, D., Lee, K.-I., Nixon, L., Golbeck, J., Mika, P., Maynard, D., Mizoguchi, R., Schreiber, G., Cudré-Mauroux, P. (eds.) ASWC 2007 and ISWC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4825, pp. 183–196. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gangemi, A., Guarino, N., Masolo, C., Oltramari, A., Schneider, L.: Sweetening ontologies with DOLCE. In: Gómez-Pérez, A., Benjamins, V.R. (eds.) EKAW 2002. LNCS, vol. 2473, pp. 166–181. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marko Luther
    • 1
  • Thorsten Liebig
    • 2
  • Sebastian Böhm
    • 1
  • Olaf Noppens
    • 2
  1. 1.DOCOMO Communications Laboratory Europe GmbHMunichGermany
  2. 2.Inst. of AIUlm UniversityUlmGermany

Personalised recommendations