Abstract
Incremental/iterative development is often considered to be the best approach to develop large scale information management applications. In an application using an ontology as a central component at design and/or runtime (ontology based system) that is built using this approach, the ontology itself might be constantly modified to satisfy new and changing requirements. Since many other artifacts, e.g., queries, inter-component message formats, code, in the application are dependent on the ontology definition, changes to it necessitate changes to other artifacts and thus might prove to be very expensive. To alleviate this, we address the specific problem of detecting the SPARQL queries that need to be modified due to changes to an OWL ontology (T-Box). Our approach is based on a novel evaluation function for SPARQL queries, which maps a query to the extensions of T-Box elements. This evaluation is used to match the query with the semantics of the changes made to the ontology to determine if the query is dirty- i.e., needs to be modified. We present an implementation of the technique, integrated with a popular ontology development environment and provide an evaluation of our technique on a real-life as well as benchmark applications.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Ambler, S.: Agile Database Techniques: Effective Strategies for the Agile Software Developer. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester (2003)
Boehm, B.W.: A spiral model of software development and enhancement. IEEE Computer 21(5), 61–72 (1988)
Donini, F.M.: Complexity of reasoning. In: Description Logic Handbook, pp. 96–136 (2007)
Guarino, N.: Formal ontology and information systems. In: 1st International Conference on Formal Ontologies in Information Systems, FOIS 1998 (1998)
Horrocks, I., Sattler, U.: A tableau decision procedure for \(\mathcal{SHOIQ}\). J. of Automated Reasoning 39(3), 249–276 (2007)
Inmon, W.H.: Building the Data Warehouse. John Wiley and sons Inc., Chichester (2002)
Jorge, C., Martin, H., Miltiadis, L. (eds.): The Semantic Web. Real-world Applications from Industry. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Klein, M.: Change Management for Distributed Ontologies. Ph.D thesis, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (August 2004)
Leenheer, P.D., Mens, T.: Ontology evolution: State of the art and future directions. In: Hepp, M., Leenheer, P.D., Moor, A.D., Sure, Y. (eds.) Ontology Management. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)
Liang, Y.: Enabling active ontology change management within semantic web-based applications. Technical report, School of Electronics and Computer Science, University of Southampton (2006)
Lehigh university benchmark, http://swat.cse.lehigh.edu/projects/lubm/
Ma, L., Yang, Y., Qiu, Z., Xie, G., Pan, Y., Liu, S.: Towards a complete owl ontology benchmark. In: Sure, Y., Domingue, J. (eds.) ESWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4011, pp. 125–139. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Martin, R.C.: Agile Software Development: Principles, Patterns, and Practices. Prentice Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River (2003)
Noy, N.F., Kunnatur, S., Klein, M., Musen, M.A.: Tracking changes during ontology evolution. In: Third International Conference on the Semantic Web (2004)
Noy, N.F., Musen, M.A.: Promptdiff: A fixed-point algorithm for comparing ontology versions. In: Eighteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI),
Patel-Schneider, P.F., Horrocks, I.: Owl web ontology language semantics and abstract syntax, w3c recommendation, http://www.w3.org/tr/owl-semantics/
Perez, J., Arenas, M., Gutierrez, C.: Semantics and complexity of sparql. In: Cruz, I., Decker, S., Allemang, D., Preist, C., Schwabe, D., Mika, P., Uschold, M., Aroyo, L.M. (eds.) ISWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4273, pp. 30–43. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Plessers, P., Troyer, O.D., Casteleyn, S.: Understanding ontology evolution: A change detection approach. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 5 (2007)
The protege ontology editor and knowledge acquisition system, http://protege.stanford.edu/
Prudhommeaux, E., Seaborne, A.: Sparql query language for rdf, w3c recommendation, http://www.w3.org/tr/2008/rec-rdf-sparql-query-20080115/
Schenk, S., Staab, S.: Networked graphs: a declarative mechanism for sparql rules, sparql views and rdf data integration on the web. In: WWW 2008: Proceeding of the 17th international conference on World Wide Web, pp. 585–594. ACM, New York (2008)
Sirin, E., Parsia, B.: Sparql-dl: Sparql query for owl-dl. In: 3rd OWL Experiences and Directions Workshop (OWLED) (2007)
Soma, R., Bakshi, A., Prasanna, V., Sie, W.D., Bourgeois, B.: Semantic web technologies for smart oil field applications. In: 2nd SPE Intelligent Energy Conference and Exhibition (February 2008)
Stojanovic, L.: Methods and Tools for Ontology Evolution. Ph.D thesis, University of Karlsruhe (2004)
Volz, R., Staab, S., Motik, B.: Incremental maintenance of materialized ontologies. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z., Schmidt, D.C. (eds.) CoopIS 2003, DOA 2003, and ODBASE 2003. LNCS, vol. 2888, pp. 707–724. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Soma, R., Prasanna, V.K. (2008). Detecting Dirty Queries during Iterative Development of OWL Based Applications. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds) On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems: OTM 2008. OTM 2008. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5332. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-88873-4_39
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-88873-4_39
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-88872-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-88873-4
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)