Ontology Versioning and Change Detection on the Web

Klein, Michel; Fensel, Dieter; Kiryakov, Atanas; Ognyanov, Damyan

doi:10.1007/3-540-45810-7_20

Cited by 160 publications

(140 citation statements)

References 7 publications

(9 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

130

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In principle, all the steps can be automated. A tool that helps to automate steps 1 and 2 is described in [31]. This tool will compare two versions of an ontology and derive the list of change operations that is necessary to transform the one into the other.…”

Section: Operation Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reasoning and change management in modular ontologies

Stuckenschmidt

Klein

2007

Data & Knowledge Engineering

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The benefits of modular representations are well known from many areas of computer science. In this paper, we concentrate on the benefits of modular ontologies with respect to local containment of terminological reasoning. We define an architecture for modular ontologies that supports local reasoning by compiling implied subsumption relations. We further address the problem of guaranteeing the integrity of a modular ontology in the presence of local changes. We propose a strategy for analyzing changes and guiding the process of updating compiled information.Key words: Ontologies, Reasoning, Distributed Knowledge Representation, Change Management MotivationCurrently, research in the area of the semantic web is in a state where ontologies are ready to applied in real applications such as semantic web portals, information retrieval or information integration. In order to lower the effort of building ontology-based applications, there is a clear need for a representational and computational infrastructure in terms of general purpose tools for building, storing and accessing ontologies. A number of such tools have been developed, i.e. ontology editors [1,2], reasoning systems [3,4] and more recently storage and query systems (e.g. [5]). Most of these tools, however,

show abstract

Section: Operation Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reasoning and change management in modular ontologies

Stuckenschmidt

Klein

2007

Data & Knowledge Engineering

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, many other methods and methodologies have been proposed for other tasks, such as ontology reengineering [29], ontology learning [2,45], ontology evaluation [25,27,35,36,41,42], ontology evolution [47,48,58,63], ontology merging [59], etc. In this paper, we will only focus on methodologies for building ontologies.…”

Section: Methods and Methodologies For Building Ontologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methodologies, tools and languages for building ontologies. Where is their meeting point?

Corcho

Fernández-López

Gómez-Pérez

2003

Data & Knowledge Engineering

538

278

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we review and compare the main methodologies, tools and languages for building ontologies that have been reported in the literature, as well as the main relationships among them. Ontology technology is nowadays mature enough: many methodologies, tools and languages are already available. The future work in this field should be driven towards the creation of a common integrated workbench for ontology developers to facilitate ontology development, exchange, evaluation, evolution and management, to provide methodological support for these tasks, and translations to and from different ontology languages. This workbench should not be created from scratch, but instead integrating the technology components that are currently available.

show abstract

“…The need to detect high-level changes is already stated in [1,4,5]. High-level understanding of changes provides a foundation for further engineering support like visualization of changes and extended pinpointing focusing on entailments of refactorings rather than individual axiom changes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are different approaches that detect ontology changes by a syntactical comparison like in [4,6] or the combination of adding and deleting RDF-triples to high-level changes in [5]. A structural comparison using matching algorithms is considered in [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Semantic Recognition of Ontology Refactoring

Gröner¹,

Parreiras²,

Staab³

2010

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Ontologies are used for sharing information and are often collaboratively developed. They are adapted for different applications and domains resulting in multiple versions of an ontology that are caused by changes and refactorings. Quite often, ontology versions (or parts of them) are syntactical very different but semantically equivalent. While there is existing work on detecting syntactical and structural changes in ontologies, there is still a need in analyzing and recognizing ontology changes and refactorings by a semantically comparison of ontology versions. In our approach, we start with a classification of model refactorings found in software engineering for identifying such refactorings in OWL ontologies using DL reasoning to recognize these refactorings.

show abstract

Ontology Versioning and Change Detection on the Web

Cited by 160 publications

References 7 publications

Reasoning and change management in modular ontologies

Reasoning and change management in modular ontologies

Methodologies, tools and languages for building ontologies. Where is their meeting point?

Semantic Recognition of Ontology Refactoring

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About