A Pragmatic Approach to Semantic Repositories Benchmarking

The aim of this paper is to benchmark various semantic repositories in order to evaluate their deployment in a commercial image retrieval and browsing application. We adopt a two-phase approach for evaluating the target semantic repositories: analytical parameters such as query language and reasoning support are used to select the pool of the target repositories, and practical parameters such as load and query response times are used to select the best match to application requirements. In addition to utilising a widely accepted benchmark for OWL repositories (UOBM), we also use a real-life dataset from the target application, which provides us with the opportunity of consolidating our findings. A distinctive advantage of this benchmarking study is that the essential requirements for the target system such as the semantic expressivity and data scalability are clearly defined, which allows us to claim contribution to the benchmarking methodology for this class of applications.

[1]  Jeff Heflin,et al.  An Evaluation of Knowledge Base Systems for Large OWL Datasets , 2004, SEMWEB.

[2]  Jens Lehmann,et al.  DBpedia: A Nucleus for a Web of Open Data , 2007, ISWC/ASWC.

[3]  Atanas Kiryakov D5.5.1 Measurable Targets for Scalable Reasoning (formerly: Definition of validation goals for the prototyping phase) , 2008 .

[4]  Lora Aroyo,et al.  The Semantic Web: Research and Applications , 2009, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[5]  James A. Hendler,et al.  The Semantic Web — ISWC 2002 , 2002, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[6]  R. Volz,et al.  Benchmarking OWL Reasoners , 2007 .

[7]  Yun Peng,et al.  A Bayesian Methodology towards Automatic Ontology Mapping , 2005, AAAI 2005.

[8]  A Min Tjoa,et al.  E-Commerce and Web Technologies , 2002, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[9]  Timo Weithöner,et al.  What ’ s Wrong with OWL Benchmarks ? , 2006 .

[10]  Peter Mika,et al.  Microsearch: An Interface for Semantic Search , 2008, SemSearch.

[11]  Ian Horrocks,et al.  Framework for an Automated Comparison of Description Logic Reasoners , 2006, SEMWEB.

[12]  Ian Horrocks,et al.  Automated Benchmarking of Description Logic Reasoners , 2006, Description Logics.

[13]  Li Ma,et al.  Towards a Complete OWL Ontology Benchmark , 2006, ESWC.

[14]  Michael Hausenblas,et al.  Exploiting Linked Data to Build Web Applications , 2009, IEEE Internet Computing.

[15]  Marina Mongiello,et al.  Automatic Ontology Mapping for Agent Communication in an e-Commerce Environment , 2005, EC-Web.

[16]  Christian Bizer,et al.  Media Meets Semantic Web - How the BBC Uses DBpedia and Linked Data to Make Connections , 2009, ESWC.

[17]  Frank van Harmelen,et al.  Sesame: A Generic Architecture for Storing and Querying RDF and RDF Schema , 2002, SEMWEB.

[18]  Orri Erling,et al.  RDF Support in the Virtuoso DBMS , 2007, CSSW.

[19]  Jeffrey M. Bradshaw,et al.  Applying KAoS Services to Ensure Policy Compliance for Semantic Web Services Workflow Composition and Enactment , 2004, SEMWEB.