DOCSLIB.ORG

An Introduction to Ontology: Survey

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
An Introduction to Ontology: Survey IJISET - International Journal of Innovative Science, Engineering & Technology, Vol. 3 Issue 2, February 2016. www.ijiset.com ISSN 2348 – 7968 An Introduction To Ontology: Survey Mr. Pranit Chettri Mr. Dhruba Ningombam Dr. C.T. Singh Dr. M.K. Ghose, M.tech,CSE, Assistant Professor, Professor, Dean Academics, Department of CSE, Department of CSE, Department of CSE, Department of CSE, Sikkim Manipal Institute Sikkim Manipal Institute Sikkim Manipal Institute Sikkim Manipal Institue of of Technology, of Technology, of Technology, Technology, Majhitar,Sikkim Majhitar,Sikkim Majhitar,Sikkim Majhitar,Sikkim ABSTRACT- Ontology is the specification of a) Domain Ontology: It represents the concept conceptualization. This paper provides concept about with respect to domain. For example, the the Ontologies and its importance in advancement of word ‘BOW’ has different meaning. An the field of Artificial intelligence. It also focuses on ontology in the domain of place is “a some of the guidelines that should be followed while District in London” and ontology in the implementing it. It also focuses on necessary field domain of weapons is “things to shoot where various ontology can be implemented and projectiles with”. Domain Ontology are proposes a future work on the same. often incompatible since it represents the concept in very specific and often eclectic I.INTRODUCTION ways. Ontology is defines as a set of primitives that is used b) Upper Ontology-It is usually applicable to to design the domain of knowledge. Ontology wide range of domain ontologies. There are language is a formal language that is used to design several standardized upper ontologies ontologies. It allows the encoding of the knowledge available for use, including BFO, BORO about specific domain and often includes reasoning method, Dublin Core, GFO, rule that supports the processing of that knowledge OpenCyc/ResearchCyc, SUMO, the Unified and they are declarative language. The Ontology Foundational Ontology (UFO) and DOLCE. separates the variables that is used for some set of WordNet, while considered an upper computation and also build relationship between ontology by some, is not strictly an them. The Ontology is created to limit the complexity ontology. However, it has been employed as and to organize the information in the field of a linguistic tool for learning domain Artificial Intelligence, the semantic web, System ontologies. engineering, Software Engineering, Biomedical Informatics, Library Science, Enterprise c) Hybrid Ontology-It is combination of both bookmarking and Information architecture. It can be domain and upper ontology. applied to problem solving. Ontology reduces the conceptual or terminological confusion and brings The formal language used to encode the ontology shared understanding that can function in unifying is ontology Languages. There are number of framework for the different viewpoints and serves such languages for ontology. basis for: a) Communication-among the system with I.I.OWL different viewpoints and the needs. Web ontology Language is the family of knowledge representation language authority b) Inter-operability-among systems achieved ontology. It is an international standard for by translating between different modeling encoding and exchanging ontologies and is methods, paradigms, languages and software designed to support the semantic web. The tools. concept of the semantic web is that information should be given explicit meaning, so that machine can process it more intelligently. It is an Ontology can be used as inter-lingua between ontology for the web and is based on the different system. To translate language Li to Lj and description logics. Descriptive logics are a vice versa ontology can be used to support the family of logics that are decidable fragments of translation between different system and first order logics. The logics focus on describing representation. There are three kinds of ontology: classes and roles ,and have a set-theoretic semantics.OWL are build upon a W3C XML 576 IJISET - International Journal of Innovative Science, Engineering & Technology, Vol. 3 Issue 2, February 2016. www.ijiset.com ISSN 2348 – 7968 standard for objects called the Resource The W3C recommendation defines an XML syntaxin Description Framework(RDF).RDF is closely order to exchange the RDF graphs. XML is a related to semantic networks since it has a graph markup language. It uses tags to provide additional based data model with labeled nodes and information about the text. The tags it uses are directed, labeled edges. It is a very flexible denoted by the angle brackets, such as the <p>, model for representing data.It has a fundamental <img> and <a> tags in the Hypertext Markup unit called statement and it corresponds to an Language (HTML). The main syntactic unit in XML edge in the graph.The RDF statement has three is the element, which typically consists of a start tag components: a subject, a predicate, and an (such as <p>), and the end tag (such as </p> and object. some contents enclosed between the tags. If it Subject: It is the source of the edges and must contains other element then it is called subelement. be a resource. Resource can be uniquely Element can have attributes which are name-value identifiable via Uniform Resource Identifier pairs. The attributes are listed inside of the element’s (URI) and it can be anything. Identifier are more start tag. often than not are Uniform Resource Locator (URL),URIs are more general than URLs. < rdf : RDF xmlns:rdf=http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf- Object: it is the target of the egde. syntax-ns# xmlns:p=http://example.org/pers-schema#> Predicate: It determines the kind of relationship <rdf:Description established between the subject and the object. rdf:about=http://example.org/~dnigombam#dhruba”> <p:teaches rdf:resource=http://example.org/~pchettri#pranit /> <p:name>dhruba nigombam</p:name> <rdf:type Rdf:resource=http://example.org/pers- schema#person” /> </rdf:Description> </rdf : RDF> Fig 2: RDF/XML syntax for the RDF graph in figure 1. In the above figure, the rdf:RDF contains an rdf:Description subelement that is used to identify a resource and to describe some of its properties. All rdf:RDF elements encodes one or more RDF Fig 1: example of RDF graph. statements. As per above example the subject of each of the statements is a resource given by the In the above figure, it shows an example of RDF “rdf:about” attributes and which has the URI graph. It contains three statements. One statement has http://example.org/~dnigombam#dhruba as it value. subject http://example.org/~dnigombam#Dhruba30TU ,U30T The rdf:Description element contains three property predicate p:teaches and object subelement and it encodes three statement.The first http://example.org/~pchettri#pranit30TU .U30T This all subelement is empty element with the qualified name statement altogether represents that “Dhruba teaches p:teaches:based on the namespace declaration at the Pranit”.The statement with predicate p:name is an beginning of the document and this refer to the example of a statement tha has a literal value(i.e, resource http://example.org/pers-schema#teaches and “dhruba nigombam”) as its object. This statement this is the predicate of the statement. The resources denotes that dhruba‘s name is “Dhruba nigombam”. that is used by the predicate is known as property. To Here p:teaches and p:name are the example of specify that “http://example.org/~pchettri#pranit” is qualified names. The third statement declares dhruba the object of the statement we use rdf:resource to be a person. attribute. The second subelement of the rdf:Description encodes such statement which have I.I.I.XML SERIALIZATION SYNTAX FOR RDF literals as objects. This element is a textual content. The statement has predicate “http://example.org/pers- 577 IJISET - International Journal of Innovative Science, Engineering & Technology, Vol. 3 Issue 2, February 2016. www.ijiset.com ISSN 2348 – 7968 schema#name” and object “Dhruba Nigombam”. The domain: propreo:chemical_entity third subelement of the rdf:Description is rdf:type By range: __Description123 using the namespace declaration at the beginning of the document, we can find that it refers to the The above stanza defines the relationship type (the predicate http://www w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax- OBO equivalent of a property) ns#type.This property in RDF allows to categorize propreo:is_described_by. The terms resources. The rdf:resources attribute is used to propreo:chemical_entity and _Description123 are specify the category such as “http://example.org/pers- used as the domain and range, respectively, of the schema#person”. relationship type being defined. I.I.II.OBO [Instance] The Open Biomedical Ontologies (OBO) is an id: propreo:water_molecule ontology language that is often being used for instance_of: propreo:inorganic_solvent_molecule modeling ontologies is life science. It is an effort to property_value: propreo:is_described_by provide a way to organized knowledge for propreo:CHEBI_1234 subsequent retrieval for shared use across different biological and medical domain. The majority of the Finally, the above stanza defines the instance (the ontologies in that repository are written in OBD Flat OBO equivalent of an individual) File Format. It is an ontology generally design for propreo:water_molecule. The instance is a member of Gene Ontology (GO). The OBO language use simple the term propreo:inorganic_solvent_molecule and has textual syntax. It was designed to be compact, propreo:CHEBI_1234 for the value of the readable by human and easy to parse. The OBO relationship propreo:is_described_by. Ontology is a collection of stanzas. Each stanzas describes one element of the ontology. It is introduced by the line containing a stanza name I.I.III.OntoUML which identifies the type of the element being described. The stanza consists of lines, each of which The OntoUML is an ontology which is well founded has a tag followed by a colon, a value, and an profile of UML for the conceptual modeling of optional comment introduced by “!”.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Semantic Web in Action
    INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY KEY CONCEPTS Corporate applications are well under way, ■ A wide variety of online Semantic Web applications are and consumer uses are emerging emerging, from Vodafone Live!’s mobile phone service to Boeing’s system for coordinating the work of vendors. ix years ago in this magazine, Tim Ber- that would make this vision come true: a com- ners-Lee, James Hendler and Ora Las- mon language for representing data that could ■ Scientific researchers are devel- sila unveiled a nascent vision of the be understood by all kinds of software agents; oping some of the most advanced S Semantic Web: a highly interconnected network ontologies—sets of statements—that translate applications, including a system that pinpoints genetic causes of of data that could be easily accessed and under- information from disparate databases into heart disease and another system stood by any desktop or handheld machine. common terms; and rules that allow software that reveals the early stages of in- They painted a future of intelligent software agents to reason about the information de- fluenza outbreaks. agents that would head out on the World Wide scribed in those terms. The data format, ontol- Web and automatically book flights and hotels ogies and reasoning software would operate ■ Companies and universities, working through the World Wide for our trips, update our medical records and like one big application on the World Wide Web Consortium, are developing give us a single, customized answer to a partic- Web, analyzing all the raw data stored in online standards that are making the Se- ular question without our having to search for databases as well as all the data about the text, mantic Web more accessible and information or pore through results.
    [Show full text]
  • Ontology and Information Systems
    Ontology and Information Systems 1 Barry Smith Philosophical Ontology Ontology as a branch of philosophy is the science of what is, of the kinds and structures of objects, properties, events, processes and relations in every area of reality. ‘Ontology’ is often used by philosophers as a synonym for ‘metaphysics’ (literally: ‘what comes after the Physics’), a term which was used by early students of Aristotle to refer to what Aristotle himself called ‘first philosophy’.2 The term ‘ontology’ (or ontologia) was itself coined in 1613, independently, by two philosophers, Rudolf Göckel (Goclenius), in his Lexicon philosophicum and Jacob Lorhard (Lorhardus), in his Theatrum philosophicum. The first occurrence in English recorded by the OED appears in Bailey’s dictionary of 1721, which defines ontology as ‘an Account of being in the Abstract’. Methods and Goals of Philosophical Ontology The methods of philosophical ontology are the methods of philosophy in general. They include the development of theories of wider or narrower scope and the testing and refinement of such theories by measuring them up, either against difficult 1 This paper is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. BCS-9975557 (“Ontology and Geographic Categories”) and by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation under the auspices of its Wolfgang Paul Program. Thanks go to Thomas Bittner, Olivier Bodenreider, Anita Burgun, Charles Dement, Andrew Frank, Angelika Franzke, Wolfgang Grassl, Pierre Grenon, Nicola Guarino, Patrick Hayes, Kathleen Hornsby, Ingvar Johansson, Fritz Lehmann, Chris Menzel, Kevin Mulligan, Chris Partridge, David W. Smith, William Rapaport, Daniel von Wachter, Chris Welty and Graham White for helpful comments.
    [Show full text]
  • Sapphire: Generating Java Runtime Artefacts from OWL Ontologies
    Sapphire: Generating Java Runtime Artefacts from OWL Ontologies Graeme Stevenson and Simon Dobson School of Computer Science, University of St Andrews, UK [email protected] Abstract. The OWL ontology language is proving increasingly popular as a means of crafting formal, semantically-rich, models of information systems. One application of such models is the direct translation of a conceptual model to a set of executable artefacts. Current tool support for such translations lacks matu- rity and exhibits several limitations including a lack of support for reification, the open-world assumption, and dynamic classification of individuals as supported by OWL semantics. Building upon the state-of-the-art we present a mapping from OWL to Java that addresses these limitations, and its realisation in the form of a tool, Sapphire. We describe Sapphire’s design and present a preliminary evalua- tion that illustrates how Sapphire supports the developer in writing concise, type safe code compared to standard approaches while maintaining competitive run- time performance with standard APIs. Keywords: Information systems, OWL, Java, Ontology, Bytecode generation, Data binding. 1 Introduction A goal of ontology-driven information systems engineering is the construction of real- world domain models with su Æcient formality, expressiveness, and semantic-richness to allow information system software components to be automatically generated from the underlying ontological description [1]. Several commentators advocate mapping from ontologies to strongly-typed program- ming languages in order to eliminate a large class of typographic errors at compile time that might only be discovered at runtime or go undetected if a dynamic approach were taken [2,3].
    [Show full text]
  • A Vision for Diagrammatic Ontology Engineering
    A Vision for Diagrammatic Ontology Engineering Gem Stapleton1, John Howse1, Adrienne Bonnington2, and Jim Burton1 1 University of Brighton, UK, g.e.stapleton,john.howse,j.burton @brighton.ac.uk, { } 2 Horizons Regional Council, NZ, [email protected] Abstract. Ontology engineering is becoming more important, given the rapid rise of data in this information age. To better understand and rea- son about this data, ontologies provide us with insight into its structure. With this comes the involvement of a wide range of stakeholders, such as information analysts, software engineers, lawyers, and domain experts, alongside specialist ontology engineers. These specialists are likely to be adept at using existing approaches to ontology development, typically description logic or one of its various stylized forms. However, not all stakeholders can readily access such notations, which often have a very mathematical style. Many stakeholders, even including fluent ontology engineers, could benefit from visual approaches to ontology engineering, provided those approaches are accessible. This paper presents ongoing re- search into a diagrammatic approach to ontology engineering, outlining key research advances that are required. Keywords: ontology engineering, diagrams, visualization 1 Introduction Ontologies are used as structural frameworks for organizing information and are a form of knowledge representation. Ontology engineering - the process of producing ontologies - is becoming increasingly important and ubiquitous in society as
    [Show full text]
  • Owlready: Ontology-Oriented Programming in Python with Automatic Classification and High Level Constructs for Biomedical Ontologies Jean-Baptiste Lamy
    Owlready: Ontology-oriented programming in Python with automatic classification and high level constructs for biomedical ontologies Jean-Baptiste Lamy To cite this version: Jean-Baptiste Lamy. Owlready: Ontology-oriented programming in Python with automatic classifi- cation and high level constructs for biomedical ontologies. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, Elsevier, 2017, 80, pp.11 - 28. 10.1016/j.artmed.2017.07.002. hal-01592746 HAL Id: hal-01592746 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01592746 Submitted on 25 Sep 2017 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Owlready: Ontology-oriented programming in Python with automatic classification and high level constructs for biomedical ontologies Jean-Baptiste Lamya,∗ aLIMICS, Université Paris 13, Sorbonne Paris Cité, 93017 Bobigny, France, INSERM UMRS 1142, UPMC Université Paris 6, Sorbonne Universités, Paris, France Abstract Objective: Ontologies are widely used in the biomedical domain. While many tools exist for the edition, alignment or evaluation of ontologies, few solutions have been proposed for ontology programming interface, i.e. for accessing and modifying an ontology within a programming language. Existing query languages (such as SPARQL) and APIs (such as OWLAPI) are not as easy-to-use as object programming languages are.
    [Show full text]
  • Semantic Web Applications
    World Wide Web Consoritum Semantic Web and Opportunities for the Oil and Gas Industry Steve Bratt (mailto:[email protected]) Chief Executive Officer World Wide Web Consortium (http://www.w3.org/) January 2008 This talk: http://www.w3.org/2008/Talks/0130-bratt-W3C-Energy/W3C-SemWeb-Appsp.pdf (2) Outline World Wide Web Consortium Mission, organization Summary of technologies Semantic Web One slide tutorial Market trends Semantic Web Applications Rapid rise in work in the field W3C’s Health Care / Life Sciences initiative Opportunities for the Oil and Gas Industry How to move forward Discussion W3C, Semantic Web, and Opportunities for the Energy Industry (2) (3) World Wide Web Consortium Mission, organization Summary of technologies W3C, Semantic Web, and Opportunities for the Energy Industry (3) (4) The Leading Web Standards Orgnization W3C engineers the Web’s foundation 1000+ technologists in 60 groups (x)HTML, XML, CSS, VoiceXML, Mobility, Ubiquity, Video, Web Services, Web 2.0, Semantic Web, Security, Accessibility, Privacy, I18N, Architecture 430 Members 60 Technical Staff 40+ Liaisons W3C, Semantic Web, and Opportunities for the Energy Industry (4) (5) Offices in 21 Countries (more under consideration) W3C, Semantic Web, and Opportunities for the Energy Industry (5) (6) Semantic Web One-slide tutorial Market trends Applications Semantic Web Introduction, Tutorial, Applications http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/CorePresentations/ ... Compiled by Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead W3C, Semantic Web, and Opportunities for the Energy
    [Show full text]
  • Knowledge Acquisition Framework from Unstructured Biomedical Knowledge Sources Demeke Asres Ayele
    Knowledge Acquisition Framework from Unstructured Biomedical Knowledge Sources Demeke Asres Ayele To cite this version: Demeke Asres Ayele. Knowledge Acquisition Framework from Unstructured Biomedical Knowledge Sources. Information Retrieval [cs.IR]. Université d’Addis Abeba, 2016. English. tel-02087577 HAL Id: tel-02087577 https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-02087577 Submitted on 18 Oct 2019 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. ADDIS ABABA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES KNOWLEDGE ACQUISITION FRAMEWORK FROM UNSTRUCTURED BIOMEDICAL KNOWLEDGE SOURCES DEMEKE ASRES AYELE A THESIS SUBMITTED TO IT DOCTORAL PROGRAM ADDIS ABABA UNIVERSITY PRESENTED IN FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (LANGUAGE TECHNOLOGY) Jury: Prof. Luciano Serafìni External Examiner Dr. Solonron Tefera Internal Examiner Dr. Jean-Pierre Chevallet Supervisor Dr. Getnet Mitikie Co-Supervisor Dr. Milion Mcshesha Co-Supervisor Dr. Dida Midekso Chairman ADDIS ABABA, ETHIOPIA 9 August 2016 Knowledge Acquisition
    [Show full text]
  • Sapphire: Generating Java Runtime Artefacts from OWL Ontologies
    Sapphire: Generating Java Runtime Artefacts from OWL Ontologies Graeme Stevenson and Simon Dobson School of Computer Science, University of St Andrews, UK [email protected] Abstract. The OWL ontology language is proving increasingly popular as a means of crafting formal, semantically-rich, models of information systems. One application of such models is the direct translation of a conceptual model to a set of executable artefacts. Current tool support for such translations lacks matu- rity and exhibits several limitations including a lack of support for reification, the open-world assumption, and dynamic classification of individuals as supported by OWL semantics. Building upon the state-of-the-art we present a mapping from OWL to Java that addresses these limitations, and its realisation in the form of a tool, Sapphire. We describe Sapphire’s design and present a preliminary evalua- tion that illustrates how Sapphire supports the developer in writing concise, type safe code compared to standard approaches while maintaining competitive run- time performance with standard APIs. Key words: Information systems, OWL, Java, Ontology, Bytecode generation, Data binding 1 Introduction A goal of ontology-driven information systems engineering is the construction of real- world domain models with sufficient formality, expressiveness, and semantic-richness to allow information system software components to be automatically generated from the underlying ontological description [1]. Several commentators advocate mapping from ontologies to strongly-typed pro- gramming languages in order to eliminate a large class of typographic errors at compile time that might only be discovered at runtime or go undetected if a dynamic approach were taken [2, 3].
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparison of Object-Triple Mapping Libraries
    Semantic Web 0 (2018) 1–0 1 IOS Press A comparison of object-triple mapping libraries Martin Ledvinka a,* and Petr Kremenˇ a a Department of Cybernetics, Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Czech Technical University in Prague, Technická 2, 166 27 Prague 6 - Dejvice, Czech Republic E-mails: [email protected], [email protected] Abstract. Domain-independent information systems like ontology editors provide only limited usability for non-experts when domain-specific linked data need to be created. On the contrary, domain-specific applications require adequate architecture for data authoring and validation, typically using the object-oriented paradigm. So far, several software libraries mapping the RDF model (representing linked data) to the object model have been introduced in the literature. In this paper, we develop a novel framework for comparison of object-triple mapping solutions in terms of features and performance. For feature comparison, we designed a set of qualitative criteria reflecting object-oriented application developer’s needs. For the performance comparison, we introduce a benchmark based on a real-world information system that we implemented using one of the compared object- triple mapping (OTM) solutions – JOPA. We present a detailed evaluation of a selected set of OTM libraries, showing how they differ in terms of features. We further narrow down the set of selected OTM libraries to contain only RDF4J-compatible ones and use the benchmark to measure their time and memory efficiency. Keywords: Object-triple Mapping, Object-ontological Mapping, Object-oriented Programming, RDF, Benchmark 1. Introduction 1.1. Motivating scenario The idea of the Semantic Web [1] might not have Let’s consider a fictive national civil aviation au- thority (CAA), which is a public governmental body seen such an explosive success as the original Web, and is obliged to publish its data as open data.
    [Show full text]
  • Semantic Access Control for Privacy Management of Personal Sensing in Smart Cities
    © 2020 IEEE. Personal use of this material is permitted. Permission from IEEE must be obtained for all other uses, in any current or future media, including reprinting/republishing this material for advertising or promotional purposes, creating new collective works, for resale or redistribution to servers or lists, or reuse of any copyrighted component of this work in other works. arXiv:2101.03209v1 [cs.CR] 8 Jan 2021 1 Semantic Access Control for Privacy Management of Personal Sensing in Smart Cities Michał Drozdowicz, Maria Ganzha, Marcin Paprzycki Abstract—Personal and home sensors generate valuable information that could be used in Smart Cities. Unfortunately, typically, this data is locked out and used only by application/system developers. While vendors are partially to blame, one should consider also the “binary nature” of data access. Specifically, either owner has full control over her data (e.g. in a “closed system”), or she completely looses control, when the data is “opened”. In this context, we propose, a semantic technologies-based, authorization and privacy control framework that enables user to maintain flexible, yet manageable data access control policies. The proposed approach is described in detail, including implementation and testing. Index Terms—Access control, semantic technologies, Smart City, data privacy, sensors, XACML, Attribute Based Access Control F 1 INTRODUCTION ANY Smart City projects rely on information collected assure the protection of privacy. Therefore, a successful M from public sensor networks monitoring, among oth- solution, gathering personal sensor information for public ers: traffic, parking availability, pollution, noise, etc. (see, use, should provide solid means of managing privacy pref- for instance, [1]).
    [Show full text]
  • State of the Semantic Web Karl Dubost and Ivan Herman
    Ivan Herman <[email protected]> State of the Semantic Web Karl Dubost and Ivan Herman, W3C INTAP Semantic Web Conference, Tokyo, Japan, March 7, 2008 (2) > Significant buzz… There is quite a buzz around “Semantics”, “Semantic Technologies”, “Semantic Web”, “Web 3.0”, “Data Web”, etc, these days New applications, companies, tools, etc, come to the fore frequently It is, of course, not always clear what these terms all mean: − “Semantic Web” is a way to specify data and data relationships; it is also a collection of specific technologies (RDF, OWL, GRDDL, SPARQL, …) − “Semantic Technologies”, “Web 3.0” often mean more, including intelligent agents, usage of complex logical procedures, etc Karl Dubost and Ivan Herman, The state of the Semantic Web (2) (3) > Significant buzz… (cont.) Predicting the exact evolution in terms of Web 3.0, Web 4.0, etc, is a bit as looking into a crystal ball But the Semantic Web technologies are already here, are used and deployed They are at the basis of further evolution Karl Dubost and Ivan Herman, The state of the Semantic Web (3) (4) > A vision on the evolution… (this Web 3.0 is not identical to the “journalistic” Web3.0; merely timing) Karl Dubost and Ivan Herman, The state of the Semantic Web (4) (5) > The 2007 Gartner predictions During the next 10 years, Web-based technologies will improve the ability to embed semantic structures [… it] will occur in multiple evolutionary steps… By 2017, we expect the vision of the Semantic Web […] to coalesce […] and the majority of Web pages are decorated with some form of semantic hypertext.
    [Show full text]
  • Weaving the Semantic Web: Contributions and Insights
    Anne Cregan Weaving the Semantic Web: Contributions and Insights Doctoral Thesis submitted in partial requirement of the award of PhD from the University of New South Wales September 2008 Research reported in this thesis has been partially financed by NICTA (http://www.nicta.com.au). NICTA is funded by the Australian Government’s Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts, and the Australian Research Council through Backing Australia’s Ability and the ICT Centre of Excellence program. It is supported by its members the Australian National University, University of NSW, ACT Government, NSW Government and affiliate partner University of Sydney. Abstract The semantic web aims to make the meaning of data on the web explicit and machine processable. Harking back to Leibniz in its vision, it imagines a world of interlinked in- formation that computers ‘understand’ and ‘know’ how to process based on its meaning. Spearheaded by the World Wide Web Consortium, ontology languages OWL and RDF form the core of the current technical offerings. RDF has successfully enabled the construction of virtually unlimited webs of data, whilst OWL gives the ability to express complex re- lationships between RDF data triples. However, the formal semantics of these languages limit themselves to that aspect of meaning that can be captured by mechanical inference rules, leaving many open questions as to other aspects of meaning and how they might be made machine processable. The Semantic Web has faced a number of problems that are addressed by the included publications. Its germination within academia, and logical semantics has seen it struggle to become familiar, accessible and implementable for the general IT population, so an overview of semantic technologies is provided.
    [Show full text]