Visualization of Ontology Evolution using OntoDiffGraph

Authors André Lara, Pedro Rangel Henriques, Alda Lopes Gançarski



PDF
Thumbnail PDF

File

OASIcs.SLATE.2017.14.pdf
  • Filesize: 484 kB
  • 8 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

André Lara
Pedro Rangel Henriques
Alda Lopes Gançarski

Cite AsGet BibTex

André Lara, Pedro Rangel Henriques, and Alda Lopes Gançarski. Visualization of Ontology Evolution using OntoDiffGraph. In 6th Symposium on Languages, Applications and Technologies (SLATE 2017). Open Access Series in Informatics (OASIcs), Volume 56, pp. 14:1-14:8, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2017)
https://doi.org/10.4230/OASIcs.SLATE.2017.14

Abstract

Ontologies evolve with the passing of time due to improvements, corrections or changes in requirements that need to be made. In this paper we describe a thesis work aiming at the creation of a visualization technique with the objective of allowing the viewer to easily identify changes made in an ontology. With the use of a specification based on the already existing Visual Notation for OWL Ontologies (VOWL) it is possible to display the differences that exist between two versions of an ontology. The proposed approach will be implemented in an application, that is also discussed in the paper.
Keywords
  • Ontology Evolution
  • Ontology Visualization

Metrics

  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    0
    PDF Downloads

References

  1. Sean Bechhofer, Frank van Harmelen, Jim Hendler, Ian Horrocks, Deborah L. McGuinness, Peter F. Patel-Schneider, and Lynn Andrea Stein. OWL Web Ontology Language Reference. World Wide Web Consortium, 2004. URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-owl-ref-20040210/.
  2. Dave Beckett. RDF/XML Syntax Specification (Revised). World Wide Web Consortium, 2004. URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-syntax-grammar-20040210/.
  3. Giuseppe Di Battista, Peter Eades, Roberto Tamassia, and Ioannis G. Tollis. Algorithms for drawing graphs: an annotated bibliography. Computational Geometry: theory and applications, 4(5):235-282, 1994. Google Scholar
  4. Ramanathan Guha and Dan Brickley. RDF Schema 1.1 Recommendation. World Wide Web Consortium, 2014. URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-rdf-schema-20140225/.
  5. Michael Hartung, Anika Gross, and Erhard Rahm. CODEX: exploration of semantic changes between ontology versions. Bioinformatics, 28(6):895-896, 2012. Google Scholar
  6. Matthew Horridge and Sean Bechhofer. The OWL API: A Java API for OWL Ontologies. Semantic Web, 2(1):11-21, January 2011. Google Scholar
  7. Petr Kremen, Marek Smid, and Zdenek Kouba. OWLDiff: a practical tool for comparison and merge of OWL ontologies. In 22nd International Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications, pages 229-233, 2011. Google Scholar
  8. André Lara. Visualization of Ontology Evolution using OntoDiffGraph. Master’s thesis, University of Minho, 2017. Google Scholar
  9. Steffen Lohmann, Stefan Negru, Florian Haag, and Thomas Ertl. VOWL 2: user-oriented visualization of ontologies. In Krzysztof Janowicz, Stefan Schlobach, Patrick Lambrix, and Eero Hyvönen, editors, International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management, pages 266-281, 2014. Google Scholar
  10. Natalya Fridman Noy, Mark A. Musen, et al. PromptDiff: A fixed-point algorithm for comparing ontology versions. In Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AAAI) Conference, pages 744-750, 2002. Google Scholar
  11. David Stephen John Perrin. Prompt-viz: Ontology version comparison visualizations with treemaps. PhD thesis, University of Victoria, Canada, 2004. Google Scholar
  12. Miguel Ángel Rodrıguez-Garcıa, Luke Slater, Keiron O'Shea, Paul N. Schofield, Georgios V. Gkoutos, and Robert Hoehndorf. Visualizing ontologies with AberOWL. In James Malone, Robert Stevens, Kerstin Forsberg, and Andrea Splendiani, editors, Semantic Web Applications and Tools for the Life Sciences, pages 183-192, December 2015. Google Scholar
Questions / Remarks / Feedback
X

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing


Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail