Empirical analysis of domain ontology usage on the Web: eCommerce domain in focus

In the recent past, there has been an exponential growth in Resource Description Framework data on the web known as web of data. The emergence of the web of data is transforming the existing web from a document‐sharing medium to a decentralized knowledge platform for publishing and sharing information between humans and computers. To enable common understanding between different users, domain ontologies are being developed and deployed to annotate information on the web. This semantically annotated information is then accessed by machines to extract and aggregate information, on the basis of the underlying ontologies used. To effectively and efficiently access data on the web, insight into the usage of ontology is pivotal, because this assists users in experiencing the benefits offered by the Semantic Web. However, such an approach has not been proposed in the literature. In this paper, we present a pragmatic approach to the analysis of domain ontology usage on the web. We propose metrics to measure the use of domain ontology constructs on the web from different aspects. To comprehensively understand the usage patterns of conceptual knowledge, instance data, and ontology co‐usability, we considered GoodRelations ontology as the domain ontology and built a dataset by collecting structured data from 211 web‐based data sources that have published information using the domain ontology. The dataset is analyzed by using the proposed metrics and observations along with their usability and applicability to the different users of the Semantic Web. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

[1]  Xiang Zhang,et al.  Finding Important Vocabulary Within Ontology , 2006, ASWC.

[2]  Li Ding,et al.  How the Semantic Web is Being Used: An Analysis of FOAF Documents , 2005, Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[3]  Dick H. J. Epema,et al.  The problem of upload competition in peer‐to‐peer systems with incentive mechanisms , 2013, Concurr. Comput. Pract. Exp..

[4]  Andreas Harth,et al.  Scalable Authoritative OWL Reasoning for the Web , 2009, Int. J. Semantic Web Inf. Syst..

[5]  Elizabeth Chang,et al.  Semantic Web Service matchmakers: state of the art and challenges , 2013, Concurr. Comput. Pract. Exp..

[6]  Herman J. ter Horst,et al.  Completeness, decidability and complexity of entailment for RDF Schema and a semantic extension involving the OWL vocabulary , 2005, J. Web Semant..

[7]  N. F. Noy,et al.  Ontology Development 101: A Guide to Creating Your First Ontology , 2001 .

[8]  Andreas Harth,et al.  Weaving the Pedantic Web , 2010, LDOW.

[9]  Tim Berners-Lee,et al.  Linked Data - The Story So Far , 2009, Int. J. Semantic Web Inf. Syst..

[10]  Amit P. Sheth,et al.  Linked Data Is Merely More Data , 2010, AAAI Spring Symposium: Linked Data Meets Artificial Intelligence.

[11]  Elena Paslaru Bontas Simperl,et al.  Labels in the Web of Data , 2011, SEMWEB.

[12]  Grigoris Antoniou,et al.  Evolving Ontology Evolution , 2006, SOFSEM.

[13]  Martin Hepp,et al.  GoodRelations: An Ontology for Describing Products and Services Offers on the Web , 2008, EKAW.

[14]  Recommended by thesis supervisor: , 2011 .

[15]  Aldo Gangemi,et al.  A theoretical framework for ontology evaluation and validation , 2005, SWAP.

[16]  Jiao Tao,et al.  Instance Data Evaluation for Semantic Web-Based Knowledge Management Systems , 2009, 2009 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[17]  Farookh Khadeer Hussain,et al.  SOF: a semi‐supervised ontology‐learning‐based focused crawler , 2013, Concurr. Comput. Pract. Exp..

[18]  M. Hausenblas,et al.  What is the Size of the Semantic Web ? , 2008 .

[19]  Mark E. J. Newman,et al.  Power-Law Distributions in Empirical Data , 2007, SIAM Rev..

[20]  Amit P. Sheth,et al.  OntoQA: Metric-Based Ontology Quality Analysis , 2005 .

[21]  Enrico Motta,et al.  Data linking: capturing and utilising implicit schema-level relations , 2010, LDOW.

[22]  Richard Cyganiak,et al.  Open eBusiness Ontology Usage: Investigating Community Implementation of GoodRelations , 2011, LDOW.

[23]  Brian McBride,et al.  Jena: A Semantic Web Toolkit , 2002, IEEE Internet Comput..

[24]  David Taniar,et al.  A methodology for ontology update in the semantic grid environment , 2015, Concurr. Comput. Pract. Exp..

[25]  Michel C. A. Klein,et al.  Ontology Evolution: Not the Same as Schema Evolution , 2004, Knowledge and Information Systems.

[26]  Frank van Harmelen,et al.  Ontology languages for the Semantic Web , 2005 .

[27]  Frank van Harmelen,et al.  A reasonable Semantic Web , 2010, Semantic Web.

[28]  Frank van Harmelen,et al.  A semantic web primer , 2004 .

[29]  Dimitrios Tzovaras,et al.  An ontology‐based mechanism for automatic categorization of web services , 2011, Concurr. Comput. Pract. Exp..

[30]  Nicola Guarino,et al.  An Overview of OntoClean , 2004, Handbook on Ontologies.

[31]  Martin Hepp,et al.  Possible Ontologies: How Reality Constrains the Development of Relevant Ontologies , 2007, IEEE Internet Computing.

[32]  Dieter Fensel,et al.  Ontology Library Systems: The key to successful Ontology Reuse , 2001, SWWS.

[33]  Robert Stevens,et al.  A Survey of Identifiers and Labels in OWL Ontologies , 2010, OWLED.

[34]  Mathieu d'Aquin,et al.  Cupboard - A Place to Expose Your Ontologies to Applications and the Community , 2009, ESWC.

[35]  Vilas Wuwongse,et al.  SQORE: an ontology retrieval framework for the next generation Web , 2009, SKG 2009.