Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Ontology Evolution

State of the Art and Future Directions

  • Chapter
Ontology Management

Part of the book series: Computing for Human Experience ((ADSW,volume 7))

The research area of ontology engineering seems to have reached a certain level of maturity, considering the vast amount of contemporary methods and tools for formalising and applying knowledge representation models. However, there is still little understanding of, and support for, the evolutionary aspects of ontologies. This is particularly crucial in distributed and collaborative settings such as the Semantic Web, where ontologies naturally co-evolve with their communities of use. For managing the evolution of single ontologies, established techniques from data schema evolution have been successfully adopted, and consensus on a general ontology evolution process model seems to emerge. Much less explored, however, is the problem of evolution of interorganisational ontologies. In this “complex” and dynamic setting, a collaborative change process model requires more powerful engineering, argumentation and negotiation methodologies, complemented by support for context dependency management.. It turns out that much can be learned from other domains where formal artefacts are being collaboratively engineered. In particular, the field of system engineering offers a wealth of techniques and tools for versioning, merging and evolving software artefacts, and many of these techniques can be reused in an ontology engineering setting. Based on this insight, this chapter gives a unified overview of the wide variety of models and mechanisms that can be used to support all of the above aspects of ontology evolution. The key remaining challenge is to construct a single framework, based on these mechanisms, which can be tailored for the needs of a particular environment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andany, J., Léonard, M., and Palisser, C. (1991) Management of Schema Evolution in Databases. In Proc. of the 17th Int’l Conf. on Very Large Data Bases (Barcelona, Spain), Morgan-Kaufmann, pp. 161-170

    Google Scholar 

  • Aschoff, F. R., Schmalhofer, F., van Elst, L. (2004) Knowledge mediation: A procedure for the cooperative construction of domain ontologies. In Proc. of Workshop on Agent-Mediated Knowledge Management at the 16th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI’2004) (Valencia, Spain), pp. 20-28

    Google Scholar 

  • Bachimont, B., Troncy, R., Isaac, A. (2002) Semantic commitment for designing ontologies: a proposal. In Gómez-Pérez, A., Richard Benjamins, V., eds.: Proc. of the 13th Int’l Conf. on Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management. Ontologies and the SemanticWeb (EKAW 2002) (Siguenza, Spain), Springer Verlag, pp. 114-121

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, J., Kim, W. Kim, H., and Korth., H. (1987) Semantics and implementation of schema evolution in object-oriented databases. Proc. ACM SIGMOD Conf. Management of Data, 16(3), pp. 311-322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, K. and Rajlich, V. (2000) Software Maintenance and Evolution: A Roadmap. In: Finkelstein, A. (ed. ) The Future of Sotware Engineering, Finkelstein, ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boehm, B. W. (1988). A spiral model of software development and enhancement. IEEE Computer 21(5), IEEE Computer Society Press, pp. 61-72

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouaud, J., Bachimont, B., Charlet, J., and Zweigenbaum, P. (1995) Methodological Principles for Structuring an “Ontology. ” In Proc. IJCAI95 Workshop on Basic Ontological Issues in Knowledge Sharing” (Montreal, Canada)

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohner, S. and Arnold, R. (1996) Software change impact analysis. IEEE Computer Society Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Brachman, R., McGuiness, D., Patel-Schneider, P., Resnik, L., and Borgida, A. (1991) Living with classic: When and how to use a KL-ONE-like language. In Sowa, J., ed.: Principles of Semantic Networks, Morgan Kaufmann, pp. 401-456

    Google Scholar 

  • Chikofsky, E. J. and Cross, J. H. (1990) Reverse engineering and design recovery: A taxonomy. IEEE Software 7(1), pp. 13-17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chaudhri, V. K., Farquhar, A., Fikes, R., Karp, P. D, and Rice, J. P. (1998) OKBC: A Programmatic Foundation for Knowledge Base Interoperability. In Proc. AAAI’98 Conference (Madison, WI), AAAI Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, E. M., Grumberg, O., and Peled, D. A. (2000) Model Checking, MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Codd, E. (1972) Further Normalisation of the Database Relational Model. In Rustin, R. (ed.) Database Systems, Prentice-Hall, pp. 33-74

    Google Scholar 

  • Conradi, R. and Westfechtel, B. (1998) Version Models for Software Configuration Management. ACM Computing Surveys 30(2): 232-282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Bruijn, J., Lausen, H., Pollares, A., and Fensel, D. (2006) The Web Service Modeling Language WSML: An Overview. In Proc. 3rd European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC 2006). LNCS 4011, Springer

    Google Scholar 

  • De Leenheer, P. (2004) Revising and Managing Multiple Ontology Versions in a Possible Worlds Setting. In Proc. On The Move to Meaningful Internet Systems Ph. D. Symposium (OTM 2004) (Agia Napa, Cyprus), LNCS 3292, Springer-Verlag, pp. 798-818

    Google Scholar 

  • De Leenheer, P., de Moor, A. (2005) Context-driven disambiguation in ontology elicitation. In Shvaiko, P., Euzenat, J., eds.: Context and Ontologies: Theory, Practice, and Applications. Proc. 1st Context and Ontologies Workshop, AAAI/IAAI 2005 (Pittsburgh, USA), pp. 17-24

    Google Scholar 

  • De Leenheer, P., de Moor, A., and Meersman, R. (2007) Context Dependency Management in Ontology Engineering: a Formal Approach. Journal on Data Semantics VIII, LNCS 4380, Springer-Verlag, pp. 26-56

    Google Scholar 

  • De Leenheer, P., Kopecky, J., Sharf, E., and de Moor, A. (2006) A Versioning Tool for Ontologies. DIP EU Project (FP6-507483) WP2: Ontology Management, Deliverable nr. D2. 4

    Google Scholar 

  • de Moor, A. (2002) Language/action meets organisational semiotics: Situating conversations with norms. Information Systems Frontiers, 4(3):257-272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Moor, A. (2005) Ontology-guided meaning negotiation in communities of practice. In Mambrey, P., Gräther, W., eds.: Proc. Workshop on the Design for Large-Scale Digital Communities, 2nd Int’l Conf. Communities and Technologies (C&T 2005) (Milano, Italy)

    Google Scholar 

  • de Moor, A., De Leenheer, P., and Meersman, R. (2006) DOGMA-MESS: A meaning evolution support system for interorganisational ontology engineering. In Proc. 14th Int’l Conf. Conceptual Structures (ICCS 2006) (Aalborg, Denmark), LNAI 4068, Springer Verlag, pp 189-203

    Google Scholar 

  • de Moor, A. and Weigand, H. (2007) Formalizing the evolution of virtual communities. Inf. Syst., 32(2):223-247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Troyer, O. (1993) On Data Schema Transformation, PhD Thesis, University of Tilburg, Tilburg, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diaz, A. (2005) Supporting Divergences in Knowledge Sharing Communities. PhD Thesis, Univesité Henry Poincarè, Nancy I, France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, W. K. (1997) Flexible Conflict Detection and Management in Collaborative Applications, Proc. Symp. User Interface Software and Technology, ACM Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Ehrig, H., Kreowski, H. -J., Montanari, U., and Rozenberg G. (1999) Handbook of Graph Grammars and Computing by Graph Transformation, Volume 3, World Scientific

    Google Scholar 

  • Euzenat, J., Le Bach, T., Barrasa, J., et al. (2004) State of the art on ontology alignment. Knowledge Web deliverable KWEB/2004/d2. 2. 3/v1. 2

    Google Scholar 

  • Feather, M. S. (1998) “Detecting Interference when Merging Specification Evolutions, ” Proc. 5th Int’l Workshop Software Specification and Design, ACM Press, pp. 169-176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fellbaum, C., ed. (1998) Wordnet, an Electronic Lexical Database. MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Franconi, E., Grandi, F., and Mandreoli, F. (2000) A Semantic Approach for Schema Evolution and Versioning in Object-oriented Databases. In Proc. 6th Int’l Conf. Rules and Objects in Databases (DOOD 2000) (London, UK), Springer-Verlag, pp. 1048-1060

    Google Scholar 

  • Fogel, K. and Bar, M. (2001) Open Source Development with CVS. The Coriolis Group, 2nd edition

    Google Scholar 

  • Gabel, T., Sure, Y., and Voelker, J. (2004) KAON — Ontology Management Infrastructure. SEKT deliverable D3. 1. 1. a

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaševic, D., Djuric, D., and Devedžic, V. (2006) Model Driven Architecture and Ontology Development, Springer

    Google Scholar 

  • Gómez-Pérez, A., Manzano-Macho, D. (2003) A survey of ontology learning methods and techniques. OntoWeb Deliverable D1. 5

    Google Scholar 

  • Gray, J. (1981). The transaction concept: Virtues and limitations. Proc. 7th Int’l Conf. Very Large Data Bases, pp. 144-154

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruber, T. R. (1993) A translation approach to portable ontologies. Knowledge Acquisition 5(2):199-220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guarino, N. (1998) Formal Ontology and Information Systems. In Guarino, N. (ed. ), Proc. 1st Int’l Conf. Formal Ontologies in Information Systems (FOIS98) (Trento, Italy), pp. 3--15, IOS Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Haase, P., Sure, Y., and Vrandečić, D. (2004) Ontology Management and Evolution: Survey, Methods, and Prototypes. SEKT Deliverable D3. 1. 1

    Google Scholar 

  • Haase, P. and Stojanovic, P. (2005) Consistent evolution of OWL ontologies. Proc. 2nd European Conf. Semantic Web: Research and Applications. LNCS 3532, Springer, pp. 182-197

    Google Scholar 

  • Halpin, T. (2001) Information Modeling and Relational Databases(From Conceptual Analysis to Logical Design). Morgan Kauffman

    Google Scholar 

  • Heflin, J. (2001) Towards the SemanticWeb: Knowledge Representation in a Dynamic, Distributed Environment. PhD thesis, University of Maryland, Collega Park, MD, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Hepp, M., Van Damme, C., and Siorpaes, K. (2007) Folksontology: An integrated approach for turning folksonomies into ontologies. In Proc. of the ESWC Workshop “Bridging the Gap between Semantic Web and Web 2. 0” (Innsbruck, Austria). Springer

    Google Scholar 

  • Hepp, M. (2007) Possible Ontologies: How Reality Constrains the Development of Relevant Ontologies. In Internet Computing 11(1):90-96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holsapple, C., and Joshi, K. (2002) Collaborative Approach in Ontology Design, Communications of the ACM 45(2), ACM Press, pp. 42-47

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, J. W., McIllroy, M. D. (1976) An Algorithm for Differential File Comparison, Technical Report 41, AT&T Bell Laboratories Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, D., and Ladd, D. A. (1994) Semantic Diff: A tool for summarizing the effects of modifications. In Proc. Of the Int’l Conf. on Software Maintenance (ICSM), pp. 243-252, IEEE Computer Society

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarrar, M., Demey, J., Meersman, R. (2003) On reusing conceptual data modeling for ontology engineering. Journal on Data Semantics 1(1):185-207

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarrar, M. (2006) Position paper: towards the notion of gloss, and the adoption of linguistic resources in formal ontology engineering. In Proc WWW 2006. ACM Press, pp. 497-503

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalfoglou, Y., Schorlemmer, M. (2005) Ontology mapping: The state of the art. In Proc. Dagstuhl Seminar on Semantic Interoperability and Integration (Dagstuhl, Germany).

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, R. H. (1990) Toward a Unified Framework for Version Modeling in Engineering Databases. ACM Computing Surveys 22(4):375-408, ACM Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, W. and Chou, H. (1988) Versions of Schema for Object-oriented Databases. In Proc. 14th Int’l Conf. Very Large Data Bases (VLDB88) (L. A., CA. ), Morgan Kaufmann. pp. 148-159

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiryakov, A., Ognyanov, D., and Kirov, V. (2004) A Framework for Representing Ontologies Consisting of Several Thousand Concepts Definitions. DIP Project Deliverable D2. 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, M., Kiryakov, A., Ognyanov, D., and Fensel, D. (2002) Ontology Versioning and Change Detection on the Web. Proc. 13th European Conf. Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management, pp. 192-212

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, M. and Noy, N. (2003) A Component-based Framework for Ontology Evolution. In Proc. Workshop on Ontologies and Distributed Systems, IJCAI 2003 (Acapulco, Mexico).

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, M. (2004) Change Management for Distributed Ontologies. PhD Thesis, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotis, K., Vouros, G. A., Alonso, J. P. (2004) HCOME: tool-supported methodology for collaboratively devising living ontologies. In Proc. of the 2nd Int’l Workshop on Semantic Web and Databases (SWDB 2004), Springer

    Google Scholar 

  • Kunz, W., Rittel, H. W. J. (1970) Issues as elements of information systems. Working Paper 131, Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California

    Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, B. and Habermann, A. (1990) Beyond Schema Evolution to Database Reorganization. In Proc. Joint ACM OOPSLA/ECOOP 90 Conf. Object-Oriented Programming: Systems, Languages, and Applications (Ottawa, Canada), ACM Press, pp. 67-76.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, B. (2000) A model for compound type changes encountered in schema evolution. ACM Transactions on Database Systems (TODS), 25(1):83{127, ACM Press, New York, NY, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lippe, E. and van Oosterom, N. (1992) Operation-Based Merging. In Proc. 5th ACM SIGSOFT Symp. Software Development Environments, ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, Vol. 17, No. 5, pp. 78-87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Littlejohn, S. W. (1992) Theories of human communication(4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company

    Google Scholar 

  • Madhavji, N. H.,, Fernandez-Ramil, J. and Perry, D. E. (2006) Software evolution and feedback: Theory and practice. Wiley

    Google Scholar 

  • Maedche, A., Motik, B. and Stojanovic, L. (2003) Managing multiple and distributed ontologies on the Semantic Web. VLDB Journal 12, Springer, pp. 286-302

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, J. (1993) Notes on formalizing context. In Proc. 15th Int’l Joint Conf. Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI93) (Chambry, France), 555-560. Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meersman, R. (1999) The use of lexicons and other computer-linguistic tools in semantics, design and cooperation of database systems. In Proc. Conf. Cooperative Database Systems (CODAS99), Springer Verlag, pp. 1-14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mens, T. (1999) Conditional Graph Rewriting as a Domain-Independent Formalism for Software Evolution. Proc. Int’l Conf. Agtive 1999: Applications of Graph Transformations with Industrial Relevance. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1779, Springer-Verlag, pp. 127-143

    Google Scholar 

  • Mens, T. (1999) A Formal Foundation for Object-Oriented Software Evolution. PhD Thesis, Department of Computer Science, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium

    Google Scholar 

  • Mens, T. (2002) A State-of-the-Art Survey on Software Merging. Transactions on Software Engineering 28(5): 449-462, IEEE Computer Society Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Mens, T., Van Der Straeten, R., and D’hondt, M. (2006) Detecting and resolving model inconsistencies using transformation dependency analysis. In Proc. Int’l Conf. MoDELS/UML 2006, LNCS 4199, Springer, pp. 200-214

    Google Scholar 

  • Mens, T., Taentzer, G., and Runge, O. (2007) Analyzing Refactoring Dependencies Using Graph Transformation. Journal on Software and Systems Modeling, September, Springer, pp. 269-285

    Google Scholar 

  • Mens, T. andDemeyer, S. (2007) Software Evolution. Springer

    Google Scholar 

  • Munson, J. P. and Dewan, P. (1994) A flexible object merging framework. In Proc. ACM Conf. Computer Supported Collaborative Work, ACM Press, pp. 231-241

    Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen, G. and Rieu, D. (1989) Schema Evolution in Object-Oriented Database Systems. Data and Knowledge Engineering 4(1):43-67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi,, H. (1995) The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation. Oxford University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Noy, N. F., Klein, M.: Ontology evolution: Not the same as schema evolution. Knowledge and Information Systems 6(4) (2004) 428-440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noy, N. F. and Musen, M. A. (2002). PromptDiff: A Fixed-Point Algorithm for Comparing Ontology Versions. In the Proc. 18th National Conf. Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-2002) (Edmonton, Alberta), AAAI Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Nuseibeh, B., Easterbrook, S., and Russo, A. (2000) Leveraging inconsistency in software development. IEEE Computer, 33(4):24-29

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, D., Shahar, Y., Musen, M., Shortliffe, E. (1999) Representation of change in controlled medical terminologies. AI in Medicine 15(1):53-76

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsia, B., Sirin, E., and Kalyanpur, A. (2005) Debugging OWL ontologies. Proc. 14th Int’l Conf. World Wide Web, ACM Press, pp. 633-640

    Google Scholar 

  • Penney, D. and Stein, J. (1987) Class Modification in the GemStone Object-oriented DBMS. In Proc. Int’l Conf. Object-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages, and Applications (OOPSLA) (Orlando, FL), pp. 111-117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, R. and Özsu, M. (1997) An Axiomatic Model of Dynamic Schema Evolution in Objectbase Systems. ACM Transactions on Database Systems 22(1):75-114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plessers, P. and De Troyer, O. (2006) Resolving Inconsistencies in Evolving Ontologies. In Proc. 3rd European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC 2006), Springer, pp. 200-214

    Google Scholar 

  • Plessers, P. (2006) An Approach to Web-based Ontology Evolution. PhD Thesis, Department of Computer Science, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussel, Belgium

    Google Scholar 

  • Proper, H. A. and Halpin, T. A. (1998) Conceptual Schema Optimisation: Database Optimisation before sliding down the Waterfall. Technical Report 341, Department of Computer Science, University of Queensland, Australia

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, L. and Poole, M. (1987) Conflict and Negotiation. In Porter, L. (ed. ) Handbook of Organizational Communication: an Interdisciplinary Perspective, pp. 549-599, Newbury Park: Sage

    Google Scholar 

  • Ra, Y. and Rundensteiner, E. (1997) A Transparant Schema-evolution System Based on Object-oriented view technology. IEEE Trans. of Knowledge and Data Engineering, 9 (4):600-623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rajlich, V. (1997) A model for change propagation based on graph rewriting. Proc. Int’l Conf. Software Maintenance, IEEE Computer Society Press, pp. 84-91

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramil, J. F. (2003) Continual Resource Estimation for Evolving Software. PhD Thesis, Department of Computing, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinberger, M. L., Spyns, P. (2005) Unsupervised text mining for the learning of DOGMA-inspired ontologies. In: Buitelaar P., Handschuh S., and Magnini B., (eds.), Ontology Learning and Population, IOS Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Roddick, J., Craske, N., and Richards, T. (1993) A Taxonomy for Schema Versioning Based on the Relational and Entity Relationship Models, In Proc. the 12th Int’l Conf. on Conceptual Modeling / the Entity Relationship Approach (Dallas, TX), Springer, pp. 143-154

    Google Scholar 

  • Roddick, J. (1995) A Survey of Schema Versioning Issues for Database Systems, in Information and Software Technology 37(7):383-393

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roman, D., Keller, U., Lausen, H., de Bruijn, J., Lara, R., Stollberg, M., Polleres, A., Feier, C., Bussler, C., and Fensel, D. (2005) Web Service Modeling Ontology. In Journal of Applied Ontology 1(1):77-106, IOS Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanderson, D. (1994) Cooperative and collaborative mediated research. In Harrison, T. and Stephen, T. (eds.) Computer networking and scholarly communication in the twenty-first century, State University of New York Press, pp. 95-114

    Google Scholar 

  • Skarra, A. H. and Zdonik, S. B. (1986) The Management of Changing Types in an Objectoriented Database. In Proc. Int’l Conf. on Object-Oriented Programming Systems, Languages, and Applications (OOPSLA 1986) (Portland, Oregon), pp. 483-495

    Google Scholar 

  • Sneed, H. (1995) Estimating the Costs of Software Maintenance Tasks. In Proc. Int’l Conf. Sotware Maintenance (ICSM), pp. 168-181

    Google Scholar 

  • Sowa, J. (1984) Conceptual Structures: Information Processing in Mind and Machine. Addison-Wesley

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoop, M., de Moor, A., Dietz, J. (2006) The pragmatic web: A manifesto. Communications of the ACM 49(5)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simperl, E., Tempich, C., and Mochol, M. (2007) Cost estimation for ontology development: applying the ONTOCOM model. In Abramowicz, W. and Mayr, H. Technologies for Business Information Systems, Springer, pp. 327-339

    Google Scholar 

  • Spanoudakis, G. and Zisman, A. (2001) Inconsistency management in software engineering: Survey and open research issues. Handbook of software engineering and knowledge engineering, World Scientific, pp. 329-390

    Google Scholar 

  • Spyns, P., Meersman, R., Jarrar, M. (2002) Data modelling versus ontology engineering. SIGMODRecord 31(4):12-17

    Google Scholar 

  • Stamper, R. (1992) Linguistic Instruments in Knowledge Engineering, chapter Language and Computing in Organised Behaviour, Elsevier Science Publishers, pp. 143-163

    Google Scholar 

  • Stojanovic, L., Maedche, A., Motik, B., and Stojanovic, N. (2002) User-driven ontology evolution management. Proc. 13th European Conf. Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management. pp. 285-300

    Google Scholar 

  • Stojanovic, L. (2004) Methods and tools for ontology evolution. PhD Thesis, University of Karlsruhe, Karlsruhe, Germany

    Google Scholar 

  • Tempich, C., Pinto, S., Sure, Y., and Staab, S. (2005) An Argumentation Ontology for Distributed, Loosely-controlled and evolving Engineering processes of ontologies. In Proc. of the 2nd European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC, 2005), LNCS 3532, Springer, pp. 241-256

    Google Scholar 

  • Verheijen, G., Van Bekkum, J. (1982) NIAM, an information analysis method. In: Proc. IFIP TC-8 Conf. Comparative Review of Information System Methodologies (CRIS 82), North-Holland

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, H., Horridge, M., Rector, A., Drummond, N., and Seidenberg, J. (2005) Debugging OWL-DL ontologies: A heuristic approach. Proc. 4th Int’l Conf. Semantic Web. Springer-Verlag

    Google Scholar 

  • Westfechtel, B. (1991) Structure-Oriented Merging of Revisions of Software Documents. Proc. Int’l Workshop on Software Configuration Management. ACM Press, pp. 68-79

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Pleinlaan 2, B-1050, Brussel, Belgium

    Pieter De Leenheer

  2. Software Engineering Lab, Université de Mons-Hainaut, 6 Avenue du champ de Mars, Mons, Belgium

    Tom Mens

Authors
  1. Pieter De Leenheer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tom Mens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Innsbruck, Technikerstr. 21a, A-6020, Innsbruck, Austria

    Martin Hepp

  2. Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Pleinlaan 2, B-1050, Brussel, Belgium

    Pieter De Leenheer

  3. CommunitySense, Cavaleriestraat 2, NL-5017 ET, Tilburg, Netherlands

    Aldo De Moor

  4. University of Karlsruhe, Vincenz-Priessnitz-Str. 1, D-76131, Karlsruhe, Germany

    York Sure

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

De Leenheer, P., Mens, T. (2008). Ontology Evolution. In: Hepp, M., De Leenheer, P., De Moor, A., Sure, Y. (eds) Ontology Management. Computing for Human Experience, vol 7. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-69900-4_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-69900-4_5

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-387-69899-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-387-69900-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics