Abstract
More and more ontologies have been published and used widely on the web. In order to make good use of an ontology, especially a new and complex ontology, we need methods to help understand it first. Identifying potentially important concepts and relations in an ontology is an intuitive but challenging method. In this paper, we first define four features for potentially important concepts and relation from the ontological structural point of view. Then a simple yet effective Concept-And-Relation-Ranking (CARRank) algorithm is proposed to simultaneously rank the importance of concepts and relations. Different from the traditional ranking methods, the importance of concepts and the weights of relations reinforce one another in CARRank in an iterative manner. Such an iterative process is proved to be convergent both in principle and by experiments. Our experimental results show that CARRank has a similar convergent speed as the PageRank-like algorithms, but a more reasonable ranking result.
This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant No.90604025 and the Major State Basic Research Development Program of China (973 Program) under Grant No.2003CB317007 and No.2007CB310803.
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alani, H., Brewster, C., Shadbolt, N.: Ranking ontologies with aktiverank. In: Cruz, I., Decker, S., Allemang, D., Preist, C., Schwabe, D., Mika, P., Uschold, M., Aroyo, L.M. (eds.) ISWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4273. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Alford, R.: Using FOAF and OWL (July 2005), http://www.mindswap.org/2005/foaf_cleaner/
Balmin, A., Hristidis, V., Papakonstantinou, Y.: Objectrank: Authority-based keyword search in databases. In: VLDB, pp. 564–575 (2004)
Bontas, E.P., Mochol, M.: Towards a cost estimation model for ontology engineering. In: Berliner XML Tage, pp. 153–160 (2005)
Brin, S., Page, L.: The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual web search engine. Computer Networks 30(1-7), 107–117 (1998)
Buitelaar, P., Eigner, T., Declerck, T.: Ontoselect: A dynamic ontology library with support for ontology selection. In: The Demo Session at the ISWC (2004)
d’Entremont, T., Storey, M.-A.: Using a degree-of-interest model for adaptive visualizations in protégé. In: 9th International Protégé Conference (2006)
Ding, L., Pan, R., Finin, T., Joshi, A., Peng, Y., Kolari, P.: Finding and Ranking Knowledge on the Semantic Web. In: Gil, Y., Motta, E., Benjamins, V.R., Musen, M.A. (eds.) ISWC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3729, pp. 156–170. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
Ernst, N.A., Storey, M.-A., Allen, P.: Cognitive support for ontology modeling. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 62(5), 553–577 (2005)
Fogaras, D.: Where to start browsing the web? In: Böhme, T., Heyer, G., Unger, H. (eds.) IICS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2877, pp. 65–79. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
Gruber, T.R.: What is an ontology (December 2001)
James, W.: The principles of psychology. Harvard (1890)
Kleinberg, J.M.: Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment. J. ACM 46(5), 604–632 (1999)
Leighton, H.V., Srivastava, J.: First 20 precision among world wide web search services (search engines). Journal of the American Society for Information Science 50(10), 870–881 (1999)
Mei, J., Boley, H.: Interpreting swrl rules in rdf graphs. Electr. Notes Theor. Comput. Sci. 151(2), 53–69 (2006)
Neches, R., Fikes, R., Finin, T., Gruber, T., Patil, R., Senator, T., Swartout, W.R.: Enabling technology for knowledge sharing. AI Mag. 12(3), 36–56 (1991)
Nie, Z., Zhang, Y., Wen, J.-R., Ma, W.-Y.: Object-level ranking: bringing order to web objects. In: WWW, pp. 567–574 (2005)
Patel, C., Supekar, K., Lee, Y., Park, E.K.: Ontokhoj: a semantic web portal for ontology searching, ranking and classification. In: WIDM, pp. 58–61 (2003)
Sabou, M., Lopez, V., Motta, E.: Ontology selection for the real semantic web: How to cover the queens birthday dinner? In: Managing Knowledge in a World of Networks. LNCS, pp. 96–111. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Tu, K., Xiong, M., Zhang, L., Zhu, H., Zhang, J., Yu, Y.: Towards imaging large-scale ontologies for quick understanding and analysis. In: Gil, Y., Motta, E., Benjamins, V.R., Musen, M.A. (eds.) ISWC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3729. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)
W3C. Resource Description Framework (RDF): Concepts and Abstract Syntax (2004), http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/
W3C. SWRL: A Semantic Web Rule Language Combining OWL and RuleML (2004), http://www.w3.org/Submission/SWRL/
Wang, T.D., Parsia, B., Hendler, J.: A survey of the web ontology landscape. In: Cruz, I., Decker, S., Allemang, D., Preist, C., Schwabe, D., Mika, P., Uschold, M., Aroyo, L.M. (eds.) ISWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4273. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Wu, G.: Understanding an ontology by ranking its concepts and relations. Technical report, Tsinghua University (January 2008), http://166.111.68.66/persons/gangwu/publications/kegtr-carrank.pdf
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
Wu, G., Li, J., Feng, L., Wang, K. (2008). Identifying Potentially Important Concepts and Relations in an Ontology. In: Sheth, A., et al. The Semantic Web - ISWC 2008. ISWC 2008. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5318. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-88564-1_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-88564-1_3
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-88563-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-88564-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)