A Systematic Investigation of Explicit and Implicit Schema Information on the Linked Open Data Cloud

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7882)


Schema information about resources in the Linked Open Data (LOD) cloud can be provided in a twofold way: it can be explicitly defined by attaching RDF types to the resources. Or it is provided implicitly via the definition of the resources’ properties. In this paper, we present a method and metrics to analyse the information theoretic properties and the correlation between the two manifestations of schema information. Furthermore, we actually perform such an analysis on large-scale linked data sets. To this end, we have extracted schema information regarding the types and properties defined in the data set segments provided for the Billion Triples Challenge 2012. We have conducted an in depth analysis and have computed various entropy measures as well as the mutual information encoded in the two types of schema information. Our analysis provides insights into the information encoded in the different schema characteristics. Two major findings are that implicit schema information is far more discriminative and that applications involving schema information based on either types or properties alone will only capture between 63.5% and 88.1% of the schema information contained in the data. Based on these observations, we derive conclusions about the design of future schemas for LOD as well as potential application scenarios.


Mutual Information Conditional Entropy Graph Database Triple Pattern Schema Information 
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.
    Alexander, K., Cyganiak, R., Hausenblas, M., Zhao, J.: Describing linked datasets with the void vocabulary, (accessed March 9, 2013)
  2. 2.
    Auer, S., Demter, J., Martin, M., Lehmann, J.: LODStats – an extensible framework for high-performance dataset analytics. In: ten Teije, A., Völker, J., Handschuh, S., Stuckenschmidt, H., d’Acquin, M., Nikolov, A., Aussenac-Gilles, N., Hernandez, N. (eds.) EKAW 2012. LNCS, vol. 7603, pp. 353–362. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cover, T.M., Thomas, J.A.: Elements of Information Theory. Wiley-Interscience (1991)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gottron, T., Pickhardt, R.: A detailed analysis of the quality of stream-based schema construction on linked open data. In: CSWS 2012: Proceedings of the Chinese Semantic Web Symposium (2012) (to appear)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gottron, T., Scherp, A., Krayer, B., Peters, A.: Get the google feeling: Supporting users in finding – relevant sources of linked open data at web-scale. In: Semantic Web Challenge, Submission to the Billion Triple Track (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Harth, A., Hose, K., Karnstedt, M., Polleres, A., Sattler, K.U., Umbrich, J.: Data summaries for on-demand queries over linked data. In: WWW, pp. 411–420. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Heath, T., Bizer, C.: Linked Data: Evolving the Web Into a Global Data Space. Synthesis Lectures on the Semantic Web: Theory and Technology. Morgan & Claypool (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hogan, A., Umbrich, J., Harth, A., Cyganiak, R., Polleres, A., Decker, S.: An empirical survey of linked data conformance. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 14, 14–44 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Konrath, M., Gottron, T., Scherp, A.: Schemex – web-scale indexed schema extraction of linked open data. In: Semantic Web Challenge, Submission to the Billion Triple Track (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Konrath, M., Gottron, T., Staab, S., Scherp, A.: Schemex—efficient construction of a data catalogue by stream-based indexing of linked data. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 16, 52–58 (2012); The Semantic Web Challenge 2011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lorey, J., Abedjan, Z., Naumann, F., Böhm, C.: Rdf ontology (re-) engineering through large-scale data mining. In: Semantic Web Challenge (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Luo, X., Shinavier, J.: Entropy-based metrics for evaluating schema reuse. In: Gómez-Pérez, A., Yu, Y., Ding, Y. (eds.) ASWC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5926, pp. 321–331. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Maduko, A., Anyanwu, K., Sheth, A., Schliekelman, P.: Graph summaries for subgraph frequency estimation. In: Bechhofer, S., Hauswirth, M., Hoffmann, J., Koubarakis, M. (eds.) ESWC 2008. LNCS, vol. 5021, pp. 508–523. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Neumann, T., Moerkotte, G.: Characteristic sets: Accurate cardinality estimation for rdf queries with multiple joins. In: Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Data Engineering, ICDE 2011, Hannover, Germany, April 11-16, pp. 984–994 (2011)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Neumann, T., Weikum, G.: Scalable join processing on very large rdf graphs. In: SIGMOD Conference, pp. 627–640. ACM (2009)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schaible, J., Gottron, T., Scheglmann, S., Scherp, A.: LOVER: Support for Modeling Data Using Linked Open Vocabularies. In: LWDM 2013: 3rd International Workshop on Linked Web Data Management (to appear, 2013)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Shannon, C.: A mathematical theory of communication. Bell System Technical Journal 27, 379–423, 623–656 (1948)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yao, Y.Y.: Information-theoretic measures for knowledge discovery and data mining. In: Karmeshu (ed.) Entropy Measures, Maximum Entropy Principle and Emerging Applications. STUDFUZZ, vol. 119, pp. 115–136. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.WeST – Institute for Web Science and TechnologiesUniversity of Koblenz-LandauKoblenzGermany

Personalised recommendations