An architecture for scaling ontology networks

• Main Author: Adamou, Alessandro <1979>
• Other Authors: Ciancarini, Paolo
• Format: Doctoral Thesis
• Language: en
• Published: Alma Mater Studiorum - Università di Bologna 2013
• Subjects: INF/01 Informatica
• Online Access: http://amsdottorato.unibo.it/5528/

Constructing ontology networks typically occurs at design time at the hands of knowledge engineers who assemble their components statically. There are, however, use cases where ontology networks need to be assembled upon request and processed at runtime, without altering the stored ontologies and without tampering with one another. These are what we call "virtual [ontology] networks", and keeping track of how an ontology changes in each virtual network is called "multiplexing". Issues may arise from the connectivity of ontology networks. In many cases, simple flat import schemes will not work, because many ontology managers can cause property assertions to be erroneously interpreted as annotations and ignored by reasoners. Also, multiple virtual networks should optimize their cumulative memory footprint, and where they cannot, this should occur for very limited periods of time. We claim that these problems should be handled by the software that serves these ontology networks, rather than by ontology engineering methodologies. We propose a method that spreads multiple virtual networks across a 3-tier structure, and can reduce the amount of erroneously interpreted axioms, under certain raw statement distributions across the ontologies. We assumed OWL as the core language handled by semantic applications in the framework at hand, due to the greater availability of reasoners and rule engines. We also verified that, in common OWL ontology management software, OWL axiom interpretation occurs in the worst case scenario of pre-order visit. To measure the effectiveness and space-efficiency of our solution, a Java and RESTful implementation was produced within an Apache project. We verified that a 3-tier structure can accommodate reasonably complex ontology networks better, in terms of the expressivity OWL axiom interpretation, than flat-tree import schemes can. We measured both the memory overhead of the additional components we put on top of traditional ontology networks, and the framework's caching capabilities.