Document Open Access Logo

Semantic Web: Past, Present, and Future

Authors Ansgar Scherp , Gerd Groener , Petr Škoda , Katja Hose , Maria-Esther Vidal

PDF
Thumbnail PDF

File

TGDK.2.1.3.pdf
  • Filesize: 1.52 MB
  • 37 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Ansgar Scherp
  • Ulm University, Germany
Gerd Groener
  • Carl Zeiss SMT GmbH, Oberkochen, Germany
Petr Škoda
  • Department of Software Engineering, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
Katja Hose
  • TU Wien, Austria
Maria-Esther Vidal
  • Leibniz University of Hannover, Germany
  • TIB-Leibniz Information Centre for Science and Technology, Hannover, Germany

Funding

  • Vidal, Maria-Esther: Partially funded by Leibniz Association, program "Leibniz Best Minds: Programme for Women Professors", project TrustKG-Transforming Data in Trustable Insights; Grant P99/2020.

Acknowledgements

This article is a living document. The first version was written by Jannik, Scherp, and Staab in 2011 [Maciej Janik et al., 2011]. It was translated to German and updated by Gröner, Scherp, and Staab in 2013 [Gerd Gröner et al., 2013] and updated again by Gröner and Scherp in 2020 [Ansgar Scherp and Gerd Gröner, 2020]. This release in 2024 reflects on the latest developments in knowledge graphs and large language models.

Cite AsGet BibTex

Ansgar Scherp, Gerd Groener, Petr Škoda, Katja Hose, and Maria-Esther Vidal. Semantic Web: Past, Present, and Future. In Special Issue on Trends in Graph Data and Knowledge - Part 2. Transactions on Graph Data and Knowledge (TGDK), Volume 2, Issue 1, pp. 3:1-3:37, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2024)
https://doi.org/10.4230/TGDK.2.1.3

Abstract

Ever since the vision was formulated, the Semantic Web has inspired many generations of innovations. Semantic technologies have been used to share vast amounts of information on the Web, enhance them with semantics to give them meaning, and enable inference and reasoning on them. Throughout the years, semantic technologies, and in particular knowledge graphs, have been used in search engines, data integration, enterprise settings, and machine learning. In this paper, we recap the classical concepts and foundations of the Semantic Web as well as modern and recent concepts and applications, building upon these foundations. The classical topics we cover include knowledge representation, creating and validating knowledge on the Web, reasoning and linking, and distributed querying. We enhance this classical view of the so-called "Semantic Web Layer Cake" with an update of recent concepts that include provenance, security and trust, as well as a discussion of practical impacts from industry-led contributions. We conclude with an outlook on the future directions of the Semantic Web. This is a living document. If you like to contribute, please contact the first author and visit: https://github.com/ascherp/semantic-web-primer

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Information systems → Semantic web description languages
  • Information systems → Markup languages
  • Computing methodologies → Ontology engineering
  • Computing methodologies → Knowledge representation and reasoning
Keywords
  • Linked Open Data
  • Semantic Web Graphs
  • Knowledge Graphs

Metrics

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

Related Versions

References

  1. János Abonyi, László Nagy, and Tamás Ruppert, editors. Ontology-Based Development of Industry 4.0 and 5.0 Solutions for Smart Manufacturing and Production: Knowledge Graph and Semantic Based Modeling and Optimization of Complex Systems. Springer, 2024. Google Scholar
  2. Ghadeer Abuoda, Christian Aebeloe, Daniele Dell'Aglio, Arthur Keen, and Katja Hose. StarBench: Benchmarking RDF-star Triplestores. In QuWeDa icw. ISWC 2023, volume 3565 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings. CEUR-WS.org, 2023. URL: https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3565/QuWeDa2023-paper4.pdf.
  3. Maribel Acosta and Maria-Esther Vidal. Networks of linked data eddies: An adaptive web query processing engine for RDF data. In The Semantic Web - ISWC 2015 - 14th International Semantic Web Conference, Bethlehem, PA, USA, October 11-15, 2015, Proceedings, Part I, volume 9366 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 111-127. Springer, 2015. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25007-6_7.
  4. Maribel Acosta, Maria-Esther Vidal, Tomas Lampo, Julio Castillo, and Edna Ruckhaus. ANAPSID: an adaptive query processing engine for SPARQL endpoints. In Lora Aroyo, Chris Welty, Harith Alani, Jamie Taylor, Abraham Bernstein, Lalana Kagal, Natasha Fridman Noy, and Eva Blomqvist, editors, The Semantic Web - ISWC 2011 - 10th International Semantic Web Conference, Bonn, Germany, October 23-27, 2011, Proceedings, Part I, volume 7031 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 18-34. Springer, 2011. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25073-6_2.
  5. Christian Aebeloe, Ilkcan Keles, Gabriela Montoya, and Katja Hose. Star pattern fragments: Accessing knowledge graphs through star patterns. CoRR, abs/2002.09172, 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2002.09172.
  6. Fotis Aisopos, Samaneh Jozashoori, Emetis Niazmand, Disha Purohit, Ariam Rivas, Ahmad Sakor, Enrique Iglesias, Dimitrios Vogiatzis, Ernestina Menasalvas, Alejandro Rodríguez González, Guillermo Vigueras, Daniel Gómez-Bravo, Maria Torrente, Roberto Hernández López, Mariano Provencio Pulla, Athanasios Dalianis, Anna Triantafillou, Georgios Paliouras, and Maria-Esther Vidal. Knowledge graphs for enhancing transparency in health data ecosystems. Semantic Web, 14(5):943-976, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.3233/SW-223294.
  7. Medina Andreşel, Julien Corman, Magdalena Ortiz, Juan L. Reutter, Ognjen Savković, and Mantas Šimkus. Stable model semantics for recursive SHACL. In ACM-The Web Conference, pages 1570-1580, 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3366423.3380229.
  8. Julián Arenas-Guerrero, David Chaves-Fraga, Jhon Toledo, María S. Pérez, and Oscar Corcho. Morph-KGC: Scalable knowledge graph materialization with mapping partitions. Semantic Web, 15(1), 2022. URL: https://doi.org/10.3233/SW-223135.
  9. Donovan Artz and Yolanda Gil. A Survey of Trust in Computer Science and the Semantic Web. J. Web Sem., 5(2):58-71, 2007. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.websem.2007.03.002.
  10. Dylan Van Assche, Thomas Delva, Gerald Haesendonck, Pieter Heyvaert, Ben De Meester, and Anastasia Dimou. Declarative RDF graph generation from heterogeneous (semi-)structured data: A systematic literature review. J. Web Semant., 75:100753, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.websem.2022.100753.
  11. S. Auer, C. Bizer, G. Kobilarov, J. Lehmann, R. Cyganiak, and Z. Ives. DBpedia: A Nucleus for a Web of Open Data. In Semantic Web Conference and Asian Semantic Web Conference, pages 722-735, nov 2008. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-76298-0_52.
  12. Franz Baader, Diego Calvanese, Deborah L. McGuinness, Daniele Nardi, and Peter F. Patel-Schneider, editors. The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and Applications. Cambridge University Press, 2003. Google Scholar
  13. Franz Baader and Ulrike Sattler. An overview of tableau algorithms for description logics. Stud Logica, 69(1):5-40, 2001. URL: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013882326814.
  14. Yejin Bang, Samuel Cahyawijaya, Nayeon Lee, Wenliang Dai, Dan Su, Bryan Wilie, Holy Lovenia, Ziwei Ji, Tiezheng Yu, Willy Chung, Quyet V. Do, Yan Xu, and Pascale Fung. A Multitask, Multilingual, Multimodal Evaluation of ChatGPT on Reasoning, Hallucination, and Interactivity. CoRR, abs/2302.04023, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2302.04023.
  15. David Beckett, Tim Berners-Lee, Eric Prud'hommeaux, and Gavin Carothers. Terse RDF Triple Language, 2014. http://www.w3.org/TR/turtle/. Google Scholar
  16. Luigi Bellomarini, Markus Nissl, and Emanuel Sallinger. Blockchains as knowledge graphs - blockchains for knowledge graphs (vision paper). In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Knowledge Representation and Representation Learning co-located with the 24th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 2020), Virtual Event, September, 2020, volume 3020 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings, pages 43-51. CEUR-WS.org, 2020. URL: https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3020/KR4L_paper_3.pdf.
  17. T. Berners-Lee. Universal Resource Identifiers in WWW: A Unifying Syntax for the Expression of Names and Addresses of Objects on the Network as used in the World-Wide Web. RFC 1630, Internet Engineering Task Force, jun 1994. URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1630.txt.
  18. Tim Berners-Lee, Roy T. Fielding, and Larry M Masinter. Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax. Technical Report 3986, jan 2005. URL: https://doi.org/10.17487/RFC3986.
  19. Tim Berners-Lee, James Hendler, and Orla Lassila. The Semantic Web. Scientific American, pages 1-4, 2001. Google Scholar
  20. Tim Berners-Lee, Larry M Masinter, and Mark P. McCahill. Uniform Resource Locators (URL). Technical Report 1738, dec 1994. URL: https://doi.org/10.17487/RFC1738.
  21. Christian Bizer. The Emerging Web of Linked Data. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 24(5):87-92, 2009. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/MIS.2009.102.
  22. Eva Blomqvist. Ontocase-automatic ontology enrichment based on ontology design patterns. In International Semantic Web Conference, pages 65-80, 2009. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04930-9_5.
  23. Till Blume. Semantic structural graph summaries for evolving and distributed graphs. PhD thesis, University of Ulm, Germany, 2022. URL: https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:bsz:289-oparu-46050-1.
  24. Stefano Borgo and Claudio Masolo. Foundational choices in DOLCE. In Handbook on Ontologies, page 361–381. Springer, 2nd edition, 2009. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92673-3_16.
  25. Anna Breit, Laura Waltersdorfer, Fajar J. Ekaputra, Marta Sabou, Andreas Ekelhart, Andreea Iana, Heiko Paulheim, Jan Portisch, Artem Revenko, Annette Ten Teije, and Frank Van Harmelen. Combining machine learning and semantic web: A systematic mapping study. ACM Comput. Surv., 55(14s), jul 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3586163.
  26. Jeen Broekstra, Arjohn Kampman, and Frank Van Harmelen. Sesame: A Generic Architecture for Storing and Querying RDF and RDF Schema. In International Semantic Web Conference, pages 54-68. Springer, 2002. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-48005-6_7.
  27. Pere-Lluís Huguet Cabot and Roberto Navigli. REBEL: relation extraction by end-to-end language generation. In Marie-Francine Moens, Xuanjing Huang, Lucia Specia, and Scott Wen-tau Yih, editors, Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2021, Virtual Event / Punta Cana, Dominican Republic, 16-20 November, 2021, pages 2370-2381. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.18653/V1/2021.FINDINGS-EMNLP.204.
  28. Diego Calvanese, Benjamin Cogrel, Sarah Komla-Ebri, Roman Kontchakov, Davide Lanti, Martin Rezk, Mariano Rodriguez-Muro, and Guohui Xiao. Ontop: Answering SPARQL queries over relational databases. Semantic Web, 8(3):471-487, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.3233/SW-160217.
  29. Jeremy J. Carroll, Christian Bizer, Patrick J. Hayes, and Patrick Stickler. Semantic web publishing using named graphs. In Jennifer Golbeck, Piero A. Bonatti, Wolfgang Nejdl, Daniel Olmedilla, and Marianne Winslett, editors, Proceedings of the ISWC*04 Workshop on Trust, Security, and Reputation on the Semantic Web, Hiroshima, Japan, November 7, 2004, volume 127 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings. CEUR-WS.org, 2004. URL: https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-127/paper2.pdf.
  30. Irene Celino and Heiko Paulheim. The time traveler’s guide to semantic web research: Analyzing fictitious research themes in the ESWC "next 20 years" track. CoRR, abs/2309.13939, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2309.13939.
  31. David Chaves-Fraga, Kemele M. Endris, Enrique Iglesias, Óscar Corcho, and Maria-Esther Vidal. What are the parameters that affect the construction of a knowledge graph? In On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems: OTM 2019 Conferences - Confederated International Conferences: CoopIS, ODBASE, C&TC 2019, Rhodes, Greece, October 21-25, 2019, Proceedings, volume 11877 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 695-713. Springer, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33246-4_43.
  32. David Chaves-Fraga, Edna Ruckhaus, Freddy Priyatna, Maria-Esther Vidal, and Óscar Corcho. Enhancing virtual ontology based access over tabular data with Morph-CSV. Semantic Web, 12(6):869-902, 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.3233/SW-210432.
  33. Michelle Cheatham and Catia Pesquita. Semantic Data Integration, pages 263-305. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49340-4_8.
  34. Artem Chebotko, Shiyong Lu, and Farshad Fotouhi. Semantics preserving SPARQL-to-SQL translation. Data Knowl. Eng., 68(10):973-1000, 2009. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.datak.2009.04.001.
  35. Julien Corman, Fernando Florenzano, Juan L. Reutter, and Ognjen Savković. Validating SHACL Constraints over a SPARQL Endpoint. In International Semantic Web Conference ISWC, pages 145-163. Springer, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30793-6_9.
  36. Julien Corman, Juan L. Reutter, and Ognjen Savković. Semantics and Validation of recursive SHACL. In International Semantic Web Conference ISWC, pages 318-336. Springer, 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00671-6_19.
  37. Souripriya Das, Seema Sundara, and Richard Cyganiak. R2RML: RDB to RDF Mapping Language, 2012. https://www.w3.org/TR/r2rml/. Google Scholar
  38. Jeremy Debattista, Christoph Lange, Sören Auer, and Dominic Cortis. Evaluating the quality of the LOD cloud: An empirical investigation. Semantic Web, 9(6):859-901, 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.3233/SW-180306.
  39. Stefan Decker, Michael Erdmann, Dieter Fensel, and Rudi Studer. Ontobroker: Ontology based access to distributed and semi-structured information. In Database Semantics - Semantic Issues in Multimedia Systems, IFIP TC2/WG2.6 Eighth Working Conference on Database Semantics (DS-8), Rotorua, New Zealand, January 4-8, 1999, pages 351-369. Kluwer, 1999. Google Scholar
  40. Thomas Delva, Anastasia Dimou, Maxime Jakubowski, and Jan Van den Bussche. Data provenance for SHACL. In Proceedings 26th International Conference on Extending Database Technology, EDBT 2023, Ioannina, Greece, March 28-31, 2023, pages 285-297. OpenProceedings.org, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.48786/edbt.2023.23.
  41. Peter J. Denning. The smallness of large language models. Commun. ACM, 66(9):24-27, aug 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3608966.
  42. Anastasia Dimou, Miel Vander Sande, Pieter Colpaert, Ruben Verborgh, Erik Mannens, and Rik Van de Walle. RML: A generic language for integrated RDF mappings of heterogeneous data. In Christian Bizer, Tom Heath, Sören Auer, and Tim Berners-Lee, editors, Proceedings of the Workshop on Linked Data on the Web co-located with the 23rd International World Wide Web Conference (WWW 2014), Seoul, Korea, April 8, 2014, volume 1184 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings. CEUR-WS.org, 2014. URL: https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1184/ldow2014_paper_01.pdf.
  43. Renata Queiroz Dividino, Simon Schenk, Sergej Sizov, and Steffen Staab. Provenance, Trust, Explanations - and all that other Meta Knowledge. KI, 23(2):24-30, 2009. URL: http://www.kuenstliche-intelligenz.de/fileadmin/template/main/archiv/pdf/ki2009-02_page24_web_teaser.pdf.
  44. Xin Luna Dong. Generations of knowledge graphs: The crazy ideas and the business impact. CoRR, abs/2308.14217, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2308.14217.
  45. M. Duerst and M. Suignard. Internationalized resource identifiers (IRIs). RFC 3987, Internet Engineering Task Force, jan 2005. URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3987.txt.
  46. Marc Ehrig. Ontology Alignment: Bridging the Semantic Gap, volume 4 of Semantic Web and Beyond. Springer, 2007. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-36501-5.
  47. Kemele M. Endris, Maria-Esther Vidal, and Damien Graux. Federated query processing. In Valentina Janev, Damien Graux, Hajira Jabeen, and Emanuel Sallinger, editors, Knowledge Graphs and Big Data Processing, volume 12072 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 73-86. Springer, 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-53199-7_5.
  48. Jérôme Euzenat and Pavel Shvaiko. Ontology matching, chapter Classifications of ontology matching techniques, pages 61-72. Springer, 2007. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-49612-0.
  49. Jérôme Euzenat and Pavel Shvaiko. Ontology matching. Springer, 2007. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-49612-0.
  50. Sebastián Ferrada, Benjamin Bustos, and Aidan Hogan. Extending SPARQL with similarity joins. In ISWC (1), volume 12506 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 201-217. Springer, 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62419-4_12.
  51. Mónica Figuera, Philipp D. Rohde, and Maria-Esther Vidal. Trav-shacl: Efficiently validating networks of SHACL constraints. In Jure Leskovec, Marko Grobelnik, Marc Najork, Jie Tang, and Leila Zia, editors, WWW '21: The Web Conference 2021, Virtual Event / Ljubljana, Slovenia, April 19-23, 2021, pages 3337-3348. ACM / IW3C2, 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3442381.3449877.
  52. Giorgos Flouris, Irini Fundulaki, Panagiotis Pediaditis, Yannis Theoharis, and Vassilis Christophides. Coloring RDF Triples to Capture Provenance. In International Semantic Web Conference, volume 5823 of LNCS, pages 196-212. Springer, 2009. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04930-9_13.
  53. Luis Galárraga, Daniel Hernández, Anas Katim, and Katja Hose. Visualizing how-provenance explanations for SPARQL queries. In WWW (Companion Volume), pages 212-216. ACM, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3543873.3587350.
  54. Luis Galárraga, Kim Ahlstrøm Meyn Mathiassen, and Katja Hose. QBOAirbase: The European Air Quality Database as an RDF Cube. In ISWC (Posters, Demos & Industry Tracks), volume 1963 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings. CEUR-WS.org, 2017. URL: https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1963/paper507.pdf.
  55. Mikhail Galkin, Sören Auer, Maria-Esther Vidal, and Simon Scerri. Enterprise knowledge graphs: A semantic approach for knowledge management in the next generation of enterprise information systems. In Slimane Hammoudi, Michal Smialek, Olivier Camp, and Joaquim Filipe, editors, ICEIS 2017 - Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems, Volume 2, Porto, Portugal, April 26-29, 2017, pages 88-98. SciTePress, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.5220/0006325200880098.
  56. Mikhail Galkin, Kemele M. Endris, Maribel Acosta, Diego Collarana, Maria-Esther Vidal, and Sören Auer. Smjoin: A multi-way join operator for SPARQL queries. In Rinke Hoekstra, Catherine Faron-Zucker, Tassilo Pellegrini, and Victor de Boer, editors, Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Semantic Systems, SEMANTiCS 2017, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, September 11-14, 2017, pages 104-111. ACM, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3132218.3132220.
  57. Aldo Gangemi and Valentina Presutti. Ontology design patterns. In Handbook on Ontologies, page 221–243. Springer, 2009. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92673-3_10.
  58. Rita Gavriloaie, Wolfgang Nejdl, Daniel Olmedilla, Kent E. Seamons, and Marianne Winslett. No Registration Needed: How to Use Declarative Policies and Negotiation to Access Sensitive Resources on the Semantic Web. In European Semantic Web Symposium, volume 3053 of LNCS, pages 342-356. Springer, 2004. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-25956-5_24.
  59. José Emilio Labra Gayo, Eric Prud'hommeaux, Iovka Boneva, and Dimitris Kontokostas. Validating RDF Data. Synthesis Lectures on the Semantic Web: Theory and Technology. Morgan & Claypool Publishers, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.2200/S00786ED1V01Y201707WBE016.
  60. Floris Geerts, Thomas Unger, Grigoris Karvounarakis, Irini Fundulaki, and Vassilis Christophides. Algebraic structures for capturing the provenance of SPARQL queries. J. ACM, 63(1):7:1-7:63, 2016. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/2810037.
  61. H. Glaser, A. Jaffri, and I. Millard. Managing co-reference on the semantic web. In WWW2009 Workshop: Linked Data on the Web, 2009. URL: https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-538/ldow2009_paper11.pdf.
  62. Birte Glimm, Ian Horrocks, Boris Motik, Giorgos Stoilos, and Zhe Wang. Hermit: An OWL 2 reasoner. J. Autom. Reasoning, 53(3):245-269, 2014. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10817-014-9305-1.
  63. Birte Glimm, Yevgeny Kazakov, Ilianna Kollia, and Giorgos B. Stamou. Lower and upper bounds for SPARQL queries over OWL ontologies. In Blai Bonet and Sven Koenig, editors, Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, January 25-30, 2015, Austin, Texas, USA, pages 109-115. AAAI Press, 2015. URL: https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v29i1.9192.
  64. Birte Glimm and Heiner Stuckenschmidt. 15 years of semantic web: An incomplete survey. KI, 30(2):117-130, 2016. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13218-016-0424-1.
  65. Asunción Gómez-Pérez, Mariano Férnández López, and Oscar Corcho. Ontological engineering. Springer, 2004. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/b97353.
  66. David Gries and Fred B. Schneider. A Logical Approach to Discrete Math. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. Springer, 1993. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-3837-7.
  67. Gerd Gröner, Ansgar Scherp, and Steffen Staab. Semantic web. In Günther Görz, Josef Schneeberger, and Ute Schmid, editors, Handbuch der Künstlichen Intelligenz, 5. Auflage, pages 585-612. Oldenbourg Wissenschaftsverlag, 2013. URL: https://doi.org/10.1524/9783486719796.585.
  68. Andrey Gubichev and Thomas Neumann. Exploiting the query structure for efficient join ordering in SPARQL queries. In EDBT, pages 439-450. OpenProceedings.org, 2014. URL: https://doi.org/10.5441/002/edbt.2014.40.
  69. Ivan Habernal and Miloslav Konopík. SWSNL: semantic web search using natural language. Expert Syst. Appl., 40(9):3649-3664, 2013. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2012.12.070.
  70. Harry Halpin and Valentina Presutti. An ontology of resources: Solving the identity crisis. In European Semantic Web Conference, pages 521-534, 2009. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02121-3_39.
  71. William L. Hamilton. Graph Representation Learning. Synthesis Lectures on Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning. Morgan & Claypool Publishers, 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.2200/S01045ED1V01Y202009AIM046.
  72. Emil Riis Hansen, Matteo Lissandrini, Agneta Ghose, Søren Løkke, Christian Thomsen, and Katja Hose. Transparent Integration and Sharing of Life Cycle Sustainability Data with Provenance. In ISWC, volume 12507 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 378-394. Springer, 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62466-8_24.
  73. Andreas Harth, Katja Hose, and Ralf Schenkel, editors. Linked Data Management. Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2014. URL: http://www.crcnetbase.com/isbn/9781466582415.
  74. Olaf Hartig. Zero-Knowledge Query Planning for an Iterator Implementation of Link Traversal Based Query Execution. In ESWC (1), volume 6643 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 154-169. Springer, 2011. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21034-1_11.
  75. Olaf Hartig, Katja Hose, and Juan F. Sequeda. Linked Data Management. In Encyclopedia of Big Data Technologies. Springer, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63962-8_76-1.
  76. Jochen Heinsohn, Daniel Kudenko, Bernhard Nebel, and Hans-Jürgen Profitlich. An Empirical Analysis of Terminological Representation Systems. Artif. Intell., 68(2):367-397, 1994. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-3702(94)90071-X.
  77. Daniel Hernández, Luis Galárraga, and Katja Hose. Computing How-Provenance for SPARQL Queries via Query Rewriting. Proc. VLDB Endow., 14(13):3389-3401, 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.14778/3484224.3484235.
  78. Aidan Hogan, Eva Blomqvist, Michael Cochez, Claudia d'Amato, Gerard de Melo, Claudio Gutierrez, José Emilio Labra Gayo, Sabrina Kirrane, Sebastian Neumaier, Axel Polleres, Roberto Navigli, Axel-Cyrille Ngonga Ngomo, Sabbir M. Rashid, Anisa Rula, Lukas Schmelzeisen, Juan F. Sequeda, Steffen Staab, and Antoine Zimmermann. Knowledge graphs. CoRR, abs/2003.02320, 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2003.02320.
  79. Aidan Hogan, Eva Blomqvist, Michael Cochez, Claudia d'Amato, Gerard de Melo, Claudio Gutierrez, Sabrina Kirrane, José Emilio Labra Gayo, Roberto Navigli, Sebastian Neumaier, Axel-Cyrille Ngonga Ngomo, Axel Polleres, Sabbir M. Rashid, Anisa Rula, Lukas Schmelzeisen, Juan Sequeda, Steffen Staab, and Antoine Zimmermann. Knowledge Graphs. Synthesis Lectures on Data, Semantics, and Knowledge. Morgan & Claypool Publishers, 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.2200/S01125ED1V01Y202109DSK022.
  80. Ian Horrocks and Peter F. Patel-Schneider. KR and reasoning on the semantic web: OWL. In John Domingue, Dieter Fensel, and James A. Hendler, editors, Handbook of Semantic Web Technologies, pages 365-398. Springer, 2011. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92913-0_9.
  81. Katja Hose. Knowledge engineering in the era of artificial intelligence. In ADBIS, volume 13985 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 3-15. Springer, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42914-9_1.
  82. Katja Hose and Ralf Schenkel. Towards benefit-based RDF source selection for SPARQL queries. In SWIM, page 2. ACM, 2012. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/2237867.2237869.
  83. Katja Hose, Ralf Schenkel, Martin Theobald, and Gerhard Weikum. Database Foundations for Scalable RDF Processing. In Reasoning Web, volume 6848 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 202-249. Springer, 2011. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23032-5_4.
  84. Yu Hou, Jeremy Yeung, Hua Xu, Chang Su, Fei Wang, and Rui Zhang. From answers to insights: Unveiling the strengths and limitations of ChatGPT and biomedical knowledge graphs. medRxiv, jun 2023. Google Scholar
  85. Toshihide Ibaraki and Tiko Kameda. On the optimal nesting order for computing n-relational joins. ACM Trans. Database Syst., 9(3):482-502, 1984. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/1270.1498.
  86. Dilshod Ibragimov, Katja Hose, Torben Bach Pedersen, and Esteban Zimányi. Processing Aggregate Queries in a Federation of SPARQL Endpoints. In ESWC, volume 9088 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 269-285. Springer, 2015. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18818-8_17.
  87. Enrique Iglesias, Samaneh Jozashoori, David Chaves-Fraga, Diego Collarana, and Maria-Esther Vidal. Sdm-rdfizer: An RML interpreter for the efficient creation of RDF knowledge graphs. In Mathieu d'Aquin, Stefan Dietze, Claudia Hauff, Edward Curry, and Philippe Cudré-Mauroux, editors, CIKM '20: The 29th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Virtual Event, Ireland, October 19-23, 2020, pages 3039-3046. ACM, 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3340531.3412881.
  88. Maciej Janik, Ansgar Scherp, and Steffen Staab. The Semantic Web: Collective Intelligence on the Web. Informatik Spektrum, 34(5):469-483, 2011. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00287-011-0535-x.
  89. Simon Jupp, Sean Bechhofer, and Robert Stevens. SKOS with OWL: don't be full-ish! In Catherine Dolbear, Alan Ruttenberg, and Ulrike Sattler, editors, Proceedings of the Fifth OWLED Workshop on OWL: Experiences and Directions, collocated with the 7th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC-2008), Karlsruhe, Germany, October 26-27, 2008, volume 432 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings. CEUR-WS.org, 2008. URL: https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-432/owled2008eu_submission_22.pdf.
  90. Pallika Kanani, Andrew McCallum, and Chris Pal. Improving author coreference by resource-bounded information gathering from the web. In Conference on Artifical intelligence. Morgan Kaufmann, 2007. URL: http://ijcai.org/Proceedings/07/Papers/067.pdf.
  91. Gjergji Kasneci, Shady Elbassuoni, and Gerhard Weikum. MING: Mining Informative Entity Relationship Subgraphs. In Information and Knowledge Management. ACM, 2009. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/1645953.1646196.
  92. Andreas Kasten. Secure semantic web data management: confidentiality, integrity, and compliant availability in open and distributed networks. PhD thesis, University of Koblenz and Landau, Germany, 2016. URL: https://kola.opus.hbz-nrw.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/1393.
  93. Andreas Kasten, Ansgar Scherp, and Peter Schauß. A framework for iterative signing of graph data on the web. In Extended Semntic Web Conference. Springer, 2014. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07443-6_11.
  94. Ankesh Khandelwal, Ian Jacobi, and Lalana Kagal. Linked rules: Principles for rule reuse on the web. In Sebastian Rudolph and Claudio Gutierrez, editors, Web Reasoning and Rule Systems - 5th International Conference, RR 2011, Galway, Ireland, August 29-30, 2011. Proceedings, volume 6902 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 108-123. Springer, 2011. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23580-1_9.
  95. Holger Knublauch and Dimitris Kontokostas. Shapes constraint language (shacl). W3C Recommendation, 2017. URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/REC-shacl-20170720/.
  96. Christoph Lange, Jörg Langkau, and Sebastian R. Bader. The IDS information model: A semantic vocabulary for sovereign data exchange. In Boris Otto, Michael ten Hompel, and Stefan Wrobel, editors, Designing Data Spaces: The Ecosystem Approach to Competitive Advantage, pages 111-127. Springer, 2022. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-93975-5_7.
  97. Georg Lausen, Michael Meier, and Michael Schmidt. Sparqling constraints for RDF. In Alfons Kemper, Patrick Valduriez, Noureddine Mouaddib, Jens Teubner, Mokrane Bouzeghoub, Volker Markl, Laurent Amsaleg, and Ioana Manolescu, editors, EDBT 2008, 11th International Conference on Extending Database Technology, Nantes, France, March 25-29, 2008, Proceedings, volume 261 of ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, pages 499-509. ACM, 2008. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/1353343.1353404.
  98. Maurizio Lenzerini. Data integration: A theoretical perspective. In Proceedings of the Twenty-first ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, June 3-5, Madison, Wisconsin, USA, pages 233-246. ACM, 2002. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/543613.543644.
  99. Alberto Moya Loustaunau and Aidan Hogan. Predicting SPARQL query dynamics. In K-CAP, pages 161-168. ACM, 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3460210.3493565.
  100. Mohamed Nadjib Mami, Damien Graux, Simon Scerri, Hajira Jabeen, Sören Auer, and Jens Lehmann. Squerall: Virtual ontology-based access to heterogeneous and large data sources. In International Semantic Web Conference, pages 229-245. Springer, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30796-7_15.
  101. Deborah L. McGuinness. Ontologies come of age. In Dieter Fensel, James A. Hendler, Henry Lieberman, and Wolfgang Wahlster, editors, Spinning the Semantic Web: Bringing the World Wide Web to Its Full Potential [outcome of a Dagstuhl seminar], pages 171-194. MIT Press, 2003. Google Scholar
  102. Gabriela Montoya, Hala Skaf-Molli, and Katja Hose. The Odyssey Approach for Optimizing Federated SPARQL Queries. In ISWC, volume 10587 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 471-489. Springer, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68288-4_28.
  103. Boris Motik, Ian Horrocks, and Ulrike Sattler. Adding integrity constraints to owl. In OWLED 2007 - OWL: Experiences and Directions, volume 258, Aachen, 2007. CEUR Workshop Proceedings (CEUR-WS.org). URL: https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-258/paper11.pdf.
  104. Boris Motik, Ian Horrocks, and Ulrike Sattler. Bridging the gap between owl and relational databases. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web, 7(2):74-89, 2009. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.websem.2009.02.001.
  105. Boris Motik, Ulrike Sattler, and Rudi Studer. Query answering for OWL-DL with rules. In International Semantic Web Conference. Springer, 2004. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30475-3_38.
  106. Thomas Neumann and Gerhard Weikum. RDF-3X: a risc-style engine for RDF. Proc. VLDB Endow., 1(1):647-659, 2008. URL: https://doi.org/10.14778/1453856.1453927.
  107. Natalya Fridman Noy, Yuqing Gao, Anshu Jain, Anant Narayanan, Alan Patterson, and Jamie Taylor. Industry-scale knowledge graphs: lessons and challenges. Commun. ACM, 62(8):36-43, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3331166.
  108. Natasha Noy, Yuqing Gao, Anshu Jain, Anant Narayanan, Alan Patterson, and Jamie Taylor. Industry-scale Knowledge Graphs: Lessons and Challenges. Communications of the ACM, 62(8):36-43, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3331166.
  109. Daniel Oberle. Semantic Management of Middleware. Springer, 2006. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-27631-9.
  110. Daniel Oberle, Anupriya Ankolekar, Pascal Hitzler, Philipp Cimiano, Michael Sintek, Malte Kiesel, Babak Mougouie, Stephan Baumann, Shankar Vembu, Massimo Romanelli, Paul Buitelaar, Ralf Engel, Daniel Sonntag, Norbert Reithinger, Berenike Loos, Hans-Peter Zorn, Vanessa Micelli, Robert Porzel, Christian Schmidt, Moritz Weiten, Felix Burkhardt, and Jianshen Zhou. DOLCE ergo SUMO: On foundational and domain models in the SmartWeb Integrated Ontology (SWIntO). Web Semant., 5(3):156-174, sep 2007. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.websem.2007.06.002.
  111. Daniel Oberle, Nicola Guarino, and Steffen Staab. What is an ontology? In Steffen Staab and Ruder Studer, editors, Handbook on Ontologies. Springer, 2nd edition, 2009. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92673-3_0.
  112. Sitt Min Oo, Gerald Haesendonck, Ben De Meester, and Anastasia Dimou. Rmlstreamer-siso: an rdf stream generator from streaming heterogeneous data. In International Semantic Web Conference, pages 697-713. Springer, 2022. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-19433-7_40.
  113. Shirui Pan, Linhao Luo, Yufei Wang, Chen Chen, Jiapu Wang, and Xindong Wu. Unifying large language models and knowledge graphs: A roadmap. CoRR, abs/2306.08302, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2306.08302.
  114. Yannis Papakonstantinou, Hector Garcia-Molina, and Jennifer Widom. Object Exchange Across Heterogeneous Information Sources. In Data Engineering, pages 251-260, Washington, DC, USA, 1995. IEEE Computer Society. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDE.1995.380386.
  115. Jorge Pérez, Marcelo Arenas, and Claudio Gutierrez. Semantics and complexity of SPARQL. ACM Trans. Database Syst., 34(3):16:1-16:45, 2009. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/1567274.1567278.
  116. Freddy Priyatna, Óscar Corcho, and Juan F. Sequeda. Formalisation and experiences of r2rml-based SPARQL to SQL query translation using morph. In 23rd International World Wide Web Conference, WWW '14, Seoul, Republic of Korea, April 7-11, 2014, pages 479-490. ACM, 2014. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/2566486.2567981.
  117. Eric Prudhommeaux, Iovka Boneva, Jose Emilio Labra Gayo, and Gregg Kellogg. Shex - shape expressions, 2018. URL: https://shex.io/shex-semantics/index.html.
  118. Kashif Rabbani, Matteo Lissandrini, and Katja Hose. Optimizing SPARQL Queries using Shape Statistics. In EDBT, pages 505-510. OpenProceedings.org, 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.5441/002/edbt.2021.59.
  119. Kashif Rabbani, Matteo Lissandrini, and Katja Hose. SHACL and ShEx in the Wild: A Community Survey on Validating Shapes Generation and Adoption. In WWW (Companion Volume), pages 260-263. ACM, 2022. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3487553.3524253.
  120. Kashif Rabbani, Matteo Lissandrini, and Katja Hose. Extraction of Validating Shapes from very large Knowledge Graphs. Proc. VLDB Endow., 16(5):1023-1032, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.14778/3579075.3579078.
  121. Kashif Rabbani, Matteo Lissandrini, and Katja Hose. SHACTOR: Improving the Quality of Large-Scale Knowledge Graphs with Validating Shapes. In SIGMOD Conference Companion, pages 151-154. ACM, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3555041.3589723.
  122. Yves Raimond, Christopher Sutton, and Mark B. Sandler. Interlinking Music-Related Data on the Web. IEEE MultiMedia, 16(2):52-63, 2009. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/MMUL.2009.29.
  123. Steffen Rendle and Lars Schmidt-Thieme. Object identification with constraints. In International Conference on Data Mining. IEEE, 2006. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDM.2006.117.
  124. Philipp D. Rohde. SHACL constraint validation during SPARQL query processing. In Philip A. Bernstein and Tilmann Rabl, editors, Proceedings of the VLDB 2021 PhD Workshop co-located with the 47th International Conference on Very Large Databases (VLDB 2021), Copenhagen, Denmark, August 16, 2021, volume 2971 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings. CEUR-WS.org, 2021. URL: https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2971/paper05.pdf.
  125. Philipp D. Rohde and Maria-Esther Vidal. Towards certified distributed query processing. In Joint Proceedings of the ESWC 2023 Workshops and Tutorials co-located with 20th European Semantic Web Conference (ESWC 2023), Hersonissos, Greece, May 28-29, 2023, volume 3443 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings. CEUR-WS.org, 2023. URL: https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3443/ESWC_2023_TrusDeKW_paper_4738.pdf.
  126. Carsten Saathoff and Ansgar Scherp. Unlocking the semantics of multimedia presentations in the web with the multimedia metadata ontology. In International Conference on World Wide Web. ACM, 2010. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/1772690.1772775.
  127. Siddhartha Sahu, Amine Mhedhbi, Semih Salihoglu, Jimmy Lin, and M. Tamer Özsu. The ubiquity of large graphs and surprising challenges of graph processing: extended survey. VLDB J., 29(2-3):595-618, 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/S00778-019-00548-X.
  128. Sherif Sakr, Angela Bonifati, Hannes Voigt, Alexandru Iosup, Khaled Ammar, Renzo Angles, Walid G. Aref, Marcelo Arenas, Maciej Besta, Peter A. Boncz, Khuzaima Daudjee, Emanuele Della Valle, Stefania Dumbrava, Olaf Hartig, Bernhard Haslhofer, Tim Hegeman, Jan Hidders, Katja Hose, Adriana Iamnitchi, Vasiliki Kalavri, Hugo Kapp, Wim Martens, M. Tamer Özsu, Eric Peukert, Stefan Plantikow, Mohamed Ragab, Matei Ripeanu, Semih Salihoglu, Christian Schulz, Petra Selmer, Juan F. Sequeda, Joshua Shinavier, Gábor Szárnyas, Riccardo Tommasini, Antonino Tumeo, Alexandru Uta, Ana Lucia Varbanescu, Hsiang-Yun Wu, Nikolay Yakovets, Da Yan, and Eiko Yoneki. The future is big graphs: a community view on graph processing systems. Commun. ACM, 64(9):62-71, 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3434642.
  129. Ansgar Scherp, Thomas Franz, Carsten Saathoff, and Steffen Staab. A core ontology on events for representing occurrences in the real world. Multimedia Tools Appl., 58(2):293-331, 2012. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-010-0667-z.
  130. Ansgar Scherp and Gerd Gröner. Semantic web. In Günther Görz, Ute Schmid, and Tanya Braun, editors, Handbuch der Künstlichen Intelligenz, 6. Auflage, pages 783-816. De Gruyter, 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110659948-018.
  131. Ansgar Scherp, Carsten Saathoff, Thomas Franz, and Steffen Staab. Designing core ontologies. Applied Ontology, 6(3):177-221, 2011. URL: https://doi.org/10.3233/AO-2011-0096.
  132. Wolfgang Scheufele and Guido Moerkotte. On the complexity of generating optimal plans with cross products. In Alberto O. Mendelzon and Z. Meral Özsoyoglu, editors, Proceedings of the Sixteenth ACM SIGACT-SIGMOD-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems, 1997. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/263661.263687.
  133. Falko Schönteich, Andreas Kasten, and Ansgar Scherp. A pattern-based core ontology for product lifecycle management based on DUL. In Workshop on Ontology Design and Patterns, volume 2195 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings. CEUR-WS.org, 2018. URL: http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2195.
  134. Andreas Schwarte, Peter Haase, Katja Hose, Ralf Schenkel, and Michael Schmidt. Fedx: Optimization techniques for federated query processing on linked data. In The Semantic Web - ISWC 2011 - 10th International Semantic Web Conference, Bonn, Germany, October 23-27, 2011, Proceedings, Part I, volume 7031 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 601-616. Springer, 2011. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25073-6_38.
  135. Juan F. Sequeda and Daniel P. Miranker. Ultrawrap: SPARQL execution on relational data. J. Web Semant., 22:19-39, 2013. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.websem.2013.08.002.
  136. Umutcan Şimşek, Elias Kärle, and Dieter Fensel. RocketRML-A NodeJS implementation of a use-case specific RML mapper. In Proceeding of the First International Workshop on Knowledge Graph Building, 2019. URL: https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2489/paper5.pdf.
  137. Manu Sporny, Amy Guy, Markus Sabadello, Drummond Reed, Manu Sporny, Dave Longley, Markus Sabadello, Drummond Reed, Orie Steele, and Christopher Allen. Decentralized identifiers (DIDs) v1.0: Core architecture, data model, and representations. https://www.w3.org/TR/did-core/, 2012.
  138. Markus Stocker, Andy Seaborne, Abraham Bernstein, Christoph Kiefer, and Dave Reynolds. SPARQL basic graph pattern optimization using selectivity estimation. In Jinpeng Huai, Robin Chen, Hsiao-Wuen Hon, Yunhao Liu, Wei-Ying Ma, Andrew Tomkins, and Xiaodong Zhang, editors, Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on World Wide Web, WWW 2008, Beijing, China, April 21-25, 2008, pages 595-604. ACM, 2008. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/1367497.1367578.
  139. Giorgos Stoilos, Giorgos B. Stamou, Jeff Z. Pan, Vassilis Tzouvaras, and Ian Horrocks. Reasoning with Very Expressive Fuzzy Description Logics. J. Artif. Intell. Res., 30:273-320, 2007. URL: https://doi.org/10.1613/jair.2279.
  140. Fabian M. Suchanek, Gjergji Kasneci, and Gerhard Weikum. Yago: a core of semantic knowledge. In International Conference on World Wide Web. ACM, 2007. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/1242572.1242667.
  141. Kai Sun, Yifan Ethan Xu, Hanwen Zha, Yue Liu, and Xin Luna Dong. Head-to-tail: How knowledgeable are large language models (llm)? A.K.A. will llms replace knowledge graphs? CoRR, abs/2308.10168, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2308.10168.
  142. York Sure, Michael Erdmann, Juergen Angele, Steffen Staab, Rudi Studer, and Dirk Wenke. OntoEdit: Collaborative Ontology Development for the Semantic Web. In International Semantic Web Conference. Springer, 2002. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-48005-6_18.
  143. Thomas Pellissier Tanon, Denny Vrandecic, Sebastian Schaffert, Thomas Steiner, and Lydia Pintscher. From freebase to wikidata: The great migration. In International Conference on World Wide Web, 2016. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/2872427.2874809.
  144. Jiao Tao, Evren Sirin, Jie Bao, and Deborah L. McGuinness. Integrity constraints in OWL. In Maria Fox and David Poole, editors, Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI 2010, Atlanta, Georgia, USA, July 11-15, 2010, pages 1443-1448. AAAI Press, 2010. URL: https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v24i1.7525.
  145. Milena Trajanoska, Riste Stojanov, and Dimitar Trajanov. Enhancing knowledge graph construction using large language models. CoRR, abs/2305.04676, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2305.04676.
  146. Despoina Trivela, Giorgos Stoilos, Alexandros Chortaras, and Giorgos B. Stamou. Optimising resolution-based rewriting algorithms for OWL ontologies. J. Web Semant., 33:30-49, 2015. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.websem.2015.02.001.
  147. Giovanni Tummarello, Richard Cyganiak, Michele Catasta, Szymon Danielczyk, and Stefan Decker. Sig.ma: live views on the Web of Data. In Semantic Web Challenge 2009 at the 8th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC2009), 2009. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/1772690.1772907.
  148. Michael Uschold. Ontology and database schema: What’s the difference? Appl. Ontology, 10(3-4):243-258, 2015. URL: https://doi.org/10.3233/AO-150158.
  149. Michael Uschold and Michael Grüninger. Ontologies and semantics for seamless connectivity. SIGMOD Rec., 33(4):58-64, 2004. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/1041410.1041420.
  150. Ruben Verborgh, Olaf Hartig, Ben De Meester, Gerald Haesendonck, Laurens De Vocht, Miel Vander Sande, Richard Cyganiak, Pieter Colpaert, Erik Mannens, and Rik Van de Walle. Low-cost queryable linked data through triple pattern fragments. In Matthew Horridge, Marco Rospocher, and Jacco van Ossenbruggen, editors, Proceedings of the ISWC 2014 Posters & Demonstrations Track a track within the 13th International Semantic Web Conference, ISWC 2014, Riva del Garda, Italy, October 21, 2014, volume 1272 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings, pages 13-16. CEUR-WS.org, 2014. URL: https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1272/paper_10.pdf.
  151. Ruben Verborgh, Miel Vander Sande, Olaf Hartig, Joachim Van Herwegen, Laurens De Vocht, Ben De Meester, Gerald Haesendonck, and Pieter Colpaert. Triple pattern fragments: A low-cost knowledge graph interface for the web. J. Web Semant., 37-38:184-206, 2016. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.websem.2016.03.003.
  152. Maria-Esther Vidal, Simón Castillo, Maribel Acosta, Gabriela Montoya, and Guillermo Palma. On the selection of SPARQL endpoints to efficiently execute federated SPARQL queries. Trans. Large Scale Data Knowl. Centered Syst., 25:109-149, 2016. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-49534-6_4.
  153. Maria-Esther Vidal, Edna Ruckhaus, Tomas Lampo, Amadís Martínez, Javier Sierra, and Axel Polleres. Efficiently joining group patterns in SPARQL queries. In The Extended Semantic Web Conference, ESWC, 2010. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13486-9_16.
  154. Denny Vrandecic and Markus Krötzsch. Wikidata: a free collaborative knowledgebase. Commun. ACM, 57(10):78-85, 2014. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/2629489.
  155. W3C OWL Working Group. OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Document Overview . W3C recommendation, W3C, oct 2009. http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-overview/. Google Scholar
  156. Michael L. Wick, Aron Culotta, Khashayar Rohanimanesh, and Andrew McCallum. An entity based model for coreference resolution. In SIAM International Conference on Data Mining, pages 365-376, 2009. URL: https://doi.org/10.1137/1.9781611972795.32.
  157. Michael L. Wick, Khashayar Rohanimanesh, Karl Schultz, and Andrew McCallum. A unified approach for schema matching, coreference and canonicalization. In International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. ACM, 2008. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/1401890.1401977.
  158. Gio Wiederhold. Mediators in the architecture of future information systems. IEEE Computer, 25(3):38-49, 1992. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/2.121508.
  159. Kevin Wilkinson, Craig Sayers, Harumi A. Kuno, and Dave Reynolds. Efficient RDF storage and retrieval in Jena2. In International Workshop on Semantic Web and Databases, 2003. Google Scholar
  160. David Wood. Reliable and persistent identification of linked data elements. In David Wood, editor, Linking Enterprise Data, pages 149-173. Springer, 2010. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-7665-9_8.
  161. Guohui Xiao, Dag Hovland, Dimitris Bilidas, Martin Rezk, Martin Giese, and Diego Calvanese. Efficient ontology-based data integration with canonical iris. In The Semantic Web - 15th International Conference, ESWC 2018, Heraklion, Crete, Greece, June 3-7, 2018, Proceedings, volume 10843 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 697-713. Springer, 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93417-4_45.
  162. Vladimir Zadorozhny, Louiqa Raschid, Maria-Esther Vidal, Tolga Urhan, and Laura Bright. Efficient evaluation of queries in a mediator for websources. In Proceedings of the 2002 ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, Madison, Wisconsin, USA, June 3-6, 2002, pages 85-96, 2002. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/564691.564702.
  163. Amrapali Zaveri, Anisa Rula, Andrea Maurino, Ricardo Pietrobon, Jens Lehmann, and Sören Auer. Quality assessment for linked data: A survey. Semantic Web Journal, 7(1):63-93, mar 2015. URL: https://doi.org/10.3233/SW-150175.
  164. Yuchen Zhuang, Xiang Chen, Tong Yu, Saayan Mitra, Victor Bursztyn, Ryan A. Rossi, Somdeb Sarkhel, and Chao Zhang. Toolchain*: Efficient action space navigation in large language models with a* search. CoRR, abs/2310.13227, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2310.13227.
© 2023-2024 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH Imprint Privacy Contact