Forgetting Fragments from Evolving Ontologies

  • Heather S. Packer
  • Nicholas Gibbins
  • Nicholas R. Jennings
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6496)


Ontologies underpin the semantic web; they define the concepts and their relationships contained in a data source. An increasing number of ontologies are available on-line, but an ontology that combines information from many different sources can grow extremely large. As an ontology grows larger, more resources are required to use it, and its response time becomes slower. Thus, we present and evaluate an on-line approach that forgets fragments from an OWL ontology that are infrequently or no longer used, or are cheap to relearn, in terms of time and resources. In order to evaluate our approach, we situate it in a controlled simulation environment, RoboCup OWLRescue, which is an extension of the widely used RoboCup Rescue platform, which enables agents to build ontologies automatically based on the tasks they are required to perform. We benchmark our approach against other comparable techniques and show that agents using our approach spend less time forgetting concepts from their ontology, allowing them to spend more time deliberating their actions, to achieve a higher average score in the simulation environment.


Multiagent System Evolve Ontology Virtual City Large Ontology Concept Weighting 
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.
    Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, J., Lassila, O.: The Semantic Web. Scientific American 284(5), 28–37 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ashburner, M., Ball, C.A., Blake, J.A., Botstein, D., Butler, H., Cherry, J.M., Davis, A.P., Dolinski, K., Dwight, S.S., Eppig, J.T., et al.: Gene Ontology: tool for the unification of biology. Nature genetics 25(1), 25–29 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sidhu, A.S., Dillon, T.S., Chang, E., Sidhu, B.S.: Protein ontology: vocabulary for protein data. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rogers, J., Rector, A.: The GALEN ontology. In: Medical Informatics Europe, pp. 174–178 (1996)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Stuckenschmidt, H., Klein, M.: Structure-based partitioning of large concept hierarchies. In: McIlraith, S.A., Plexousakis, D., van Harmelen, F. (eds.) ISWC 2004. LNCS, vol. 3298, pp. 289–303. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Seidenberg, J., Rector, A.: Web Ontology Segmentation: Analysis, Classification and Use. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on WWW, NY, USA, pp. 13–22. ACM, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bailin, S., Truszkowski, W.: Ontology Negotiation between Intelligent Information Agents. The Knowledge Engineering Review 17(01), 7–19 (2002)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Afsharchi, M., Far, B., Denzinger, J.: Ontology-guided Learning to Improve Communication between Groups of Agents. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, Hakodate, Japan, pp. 923–930 (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wiesman, F., Roos, N.: Domain Independent Learning of Ontology Mappings. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, New York City, New York, USA, vol. 2, pp. 846–853 (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Soh, L.: Multiagent, Distributed Ontology Learning. In: Working Notes of the 2nd AAMAS OAS Workshop, Bologna, Italy (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Packer, H.S., Gibbins, N., Jennings, N.R.: Collaborative Learning of Ontology Fragments by Co-operating Agents. In: Web Intelligence-Intelligent Agent Technology International Conference, Toronto (2010)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Eiter, T., Ianni, G., Schindlauer, R., Tompits, H., Wang, K.: Forgetting in managing rules and ontologies. In: Proc. of the International Conference on Web Intelligence, pp. 411–419 (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wang, Z., Wang, K., Topor, R., Pan, J.: Forgetting Concepts in DL-Lite. In: Bechhofer, S., Hauswirth, M., Hoffmann, J., Koubarakis, M. (eds.) ESWC 2008. LNCS, vol. 5021, p. 245. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wang, K., Wang, Z., Topor, R., Pan, J.Z., Antoniou, G.: Concept and Role Forgetting in ALC Ontologies. In: Bernstein, A., Karger, D.R., Heath, T., Feigenbaum, L., Maynard, D., Motta, E., Thirunarayan, K. (eds.) ISWC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5823, pp. 666–681. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kitano, H., Tadokoro, S.: Robocup rescue: A grand challenge for multiagent and intelligent systems. AI Magazine 22, 1–39 (2001)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wang, K., Sattar, A., Su, K.: A Theory of Forgetting in Logic Programming. In: Proc. of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 20(2), p. 682 (2005)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lee, D., Choi, J., Choe, H., Noh, S.H., Min, S.L., Cho, Y.: Implementation and Performance Evaluation of the LRFU Replacement Policy, pp. 106–111 (1997)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Siddhartha, H., Sarika, R., Karlapalem, K.: Retrospective analysis of RoboCup rescue simulation agent teams. In: Proceedings of The 8th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, vol. (2), pp. 1365–1366 (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Heather S. Packer
    • 1
  • Nicholas Gibbins
    • 1
  • Nicholas R. Jennings
    • 1
  1. 1.Intelligence, Agents, Multimedia Group, School of Electronics and Computer ScienceUniversity of SouthamptonSouthamptonUK

Personalised recommendations