An integrated framework for enhancing the semantic transformation, editing and querying of relational databases

The transition from the traditional to the Semantic Web has proven much more difficult than initially expected. The volume, complexity and versatility of data of various domains, the computational limitations imposed on semantic querying and inferencing have drastically reduced the thrust semantic technologies had when initially introduced. In order for the semantic web to actually 'work' efficient tools are needed, allowing the semantic transformation of legacy data, which can then be queried, processed and reasoned upon. And, though remarkable efforts exist towards tackling part of the required functionality, no system integrates all tasks in a user-friendly, easy-to-adapt manner. In this context, we introduce Iconomy, an integrated framework for enhancing the Semantic Transformation, Editing and Querying of Relational Databases. Aiming to ease-of-use, scalability and extensibility, Iconomy supports state-of-the-art APIs and provides a friendly user interface to map Relational Databases into Ontologies, generate them, and consequently edit, manipulate, and infer on them as needed. This paper provides an extensive analysis of Iconomy and thoroughly discusses its performance through a number of experiments on different datasets and various configurations.

[1]  Troels Andreasen,et al.  On Measuring Similarity for Conceptual Querying , 2002, FQAS.

[2]  Abraham Bernstein,et al.  Toward intelligent assistance for a data mining process: an ontology-based approach for cost-sensitive classification , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering.

[3]  Dave Reynolds,et al.  Efficient RDF Storage and Retrieval in Jena2 , 2003, SWDB.

[4]  Ivan Jelínek,et al.  Benchmarking RDF Production Tools , 2007, DEXA.

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

[6]  Bijan Parsia,et al.  Proceedings of the 2006 International Workshop on Description Logics (DL2006), Windermere, Lake District, UK, May 30 - June 1, 2006 , 2006, Description Logics.

[7]  Dimitrios S. Alexiadis,et al.  Using Signal Processing and Semantic Web Technologies to Analyze Byzantine Iconography , 2009, IEEE Intelligent Systems.

[8]  Volker Haarslev,et al.  Querying the Semantic Web with Racer + nRQL , 2004 .

[9]  Ian Horrocks,et al.  FaCT++ Description Logic Reasoner: System Description , 2006, IJCAR.

[10]  Kurt Rohloff,et al.  An Evaluation of Triple-Store Technologies for Large Data Stores , 2007, OTM Workshops.

[11]  Vassilis Christophides,et al.  Querying the Semantic Web with RQL , 2003, Comput. Networks.

[12]  Diego Calvanese,et al.  The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and Applications , 2003, Description Logic Handbook.

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

[14]  Huajun Chen,et al.  DartGrid III: A Semantic Grid Toolkit for Data Integration , 2005, 2005 First International Conference on Semantics, Knowledge and Grid.

[15]  Deborah L. McGuinness,et al.  OWL Web ontology language overview , 2004 .

[16]  J. Carroll,et al.  Jena: implementing the semantic web recommendations , 2004, WWW Alt. '04.

[17]  Stefan Decker,et al.  Creating Semantic Web Contents with Protégé-2000 , 2001, IEEE Intell. Syst..

[18]  Bo Hu,et al.  An Evaluation of RDF Storage Systems for Large Data Applications , 2005, 2005 First International Conference on Semantics, Knowledge and Grid.

[19]  Patrick Brézillon,et al.  Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence , 1999 .

[20]  Ian Horrocks,et al.  Description Logics for the Semantic Web , 2002, Künstliche Intell..

[21]  Martin Doerr,et al.  The CIDOC Conceptual Reference Module: An Ontological Approach to Semantic Interoperability of Metadata , 2003, AI Mag..