Ontology Evolution



Ontologies are dynamic entities that evolve over time. There are several challenges associated with the management of ontology dynamics, from the adequate control of ontology changes to the identification and administration of ontology versions. Moreover, ontologies are increasingly becoming part of a network of complex relationships and dependencies, where they reuse and extend other ontologies, have associated metadata in order to ease sharing and reuse, are used to integrate heterogeneous knowledge bases, etc. Under these circumstances, a change in an ontology does not only affect the ontology itself but may also have consequences in all its related artifacts. In this chapter, we propose methodological guidelines for carrying out the ontology evolution activity. We target different scenarios, supporting users in the process of ontology evolution from a generic perspective and on how to use tools that semiautomatically assist them in discovering, evaluating, and integrating domain changes to evolve ontologies. To illustrate their applicability, we describe how such guidelines have been used in real example applications.


Ontology Evolution Background Knowledge Source Change Request Related Artifact Ontology Editor 
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. Arnold RS (1996) Software change impact analysis. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los AlamitosGoogle Scholar
  2. Banerjee J, Kim W, Kim HJ, Korth HF (1987) Semantics and implementation of schema evolution in object-oriented databases. SIGMOD Rec 16(3):311–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bennett 3KH, Rajlich V (2000) Software maintenance and evolution: a roadmap. In: ICSE - future of SE track, ACM, New York, pp. 73–87Google Scholar
  4. Berners-Lee T, Fielding R, Masinter L (2005) RFC 3986, Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic syntax. Available at
  5. Bohner SA (1996) Software change impact analysis for design evolution. In: Software change impact analysis. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, pp 67–81Google Scholar
  6. Chikofsky EJ, Cross JG (1990) Reverse engineering and design recovery: a taxonomy. IEEE Softw 7(1):13–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fellbaum C (1998) Wordnet: an electronic lexical database. MIT Press, CambridgezbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Haase P, Rudolph S, Wang Y, Brockmans S, Palma R, Euzenat J, d’Aquin M (2006) NeOn deliverable D1.1.1. Networked ontology model. Available at
  9. Klein M, Fensel D (2001) Ontology versioning for the semantic web. In: Proceedings of the international semantic web working symposium (SWWS’01), Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USAGoogle Scholar
  10. Klein M, Noy N (2003) A component-based framework for ontology evolution. In: Proceedings of the IJCAI’03 workshop: ontologies and distributed systems, Acapulco, MexicoGoogle Scholar
  11. Leenheer PD, Mens T (2007) Ontology management. Semantic web, semantic web services, and business applications. In: Ontology evolution. State-of the-art and future directions. Springer, New York/LondonGoogle Scholar
  12. Noy N, Chugh A, Liu W, Musen M (2006) A framework for ontology evolution in collaborative environments. In: International semantic web conference, Athens, pp 544–558Google Scholar
  13. Palma R (2009) Ontology metadata management in distributed environments. PhD thesis, Departamento de Inteligencia Artificial, Facultad de Informatica, Universidad Politecnica de MadridGoogle Scholar
  14. Palma R, Haase P, Wang Y, d’Aquin M (2007) D1.3.1 propagation models and strategies. Technical report D1.3.1, UPM; NeOn deliverable. Available at
  15. Palma R, Haase P, Corcho O, Gómez-Pérez A (2008a) An editorial workflow approach for collaborative ontology development. In: ASWC’08. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  16. Palma R, Haase P, Jiu Q (2008b) D1.3.2 Evaluation of propagation models and strategies. Technical report D1.3.2; NeOn deliverableGoogle Scholar
  17. Palma R, Hartmann J, Haase P (2008c) OMV – ontology metadata vocabulary for the semantic web. v. 2.4. Available at
  18. Palma R, Haase P, Corcho O, Gómez-Pérez A (2009) Change representation for OWL 2 ontologies. In: Proceedings of the fifth international workshop OWL: experiences and directions. In ISWC09, Chantilly, VA, USAGoogle Scholar
  19. Parsia B, Sirin E, Kalyanpur A (2005) Debugging OWL ontologies. In: Proceedings of the 14th international conference on world wide web. ACM Press, New York, pp 633–640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Plessers P (2006) An Approach to Web-based Ontology Evolution. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, BrusselGoogle Scholar
  21. Proper HA, Halpin TA (2004) Conceptual schema optimisation – database optimization before sliding down the waterfall. Technical report, Department of Computer Science, University of QueenslandGoogle Scholar
  22. Sabou M, d’Aquin M, Motta E (2008) Exploring the semantic web as background knowledge for ontology matching. J Data Semant XI:156–190Google Scholar
  23. Stojanovic L (2004) Methods and tools for ontology evolution. PhD thesis, University of Karlsruhe (TH)Google Scholar
  24. Studer R, Benjamins VR, Fensel D (1998) Knowledge engineering: principles and methods. Data Knowl Eng 25(1–2):161–197zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Suárez-Figueroa MC, Gómez-Pérez A (2008) First attempt towards a standard glossary of ontology engineering terminology. In: Proceedings of 8th international conference on terminology and knowledge engineering (TKE’08) Copenhagen, DENMARK, pp 1–15Google Scholar
  26. Zablith F (2009) Evolva: a comprehensive approach to ontology evolution. In: Proceedings of ESWC 2009: the semantic web: research and applications – PhD symposium, Heraklion, pp 944–948Google Scholar
  27. Zablith F, Sabou M, d’Aquin M, Motta E (2010) Using ontological contexts to assess the relevance of statements in ontology evolution. In: Proceedings of the 17th conference on knowledge engineering and knowledge management by the masses (EKAW), Lisbon, Portugal. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Poznan Supercomputing and Networking CenterPoznanPoland
  2. 2.Knowledge Media Institute (KMi)The Open UniversityMilton KeynesUK
  3. 3.fluid Operations AGWalldorfGermany
  4. 4.Ontology Engineering Group, Facultad de InformáticaUniversidad Politécnica de MadridMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations