article

A Link-Based Ranking Algorithm for Semantic Web Resources: A Class-Oriented Approach Independent of Link Direction

Authors:

Jinsoo ParkAuthors Info & Claims

Journal of Database Management, Volume 22, Issue 1

Pages 1 - 25

https://doi.org/10.4018/jdm.2011010101

Published: 01 January 2011 Publication History

Abstract

The information space of the Semantic Web has different characteristics from that of the World Wide Web WWW. One main difference is that in the Semantic Web, the direction of Resource Description Framework RDF links does not have the same meaning as the direction of hyperlinks in the WWW, because the link direction is determined not by a voting process but by a specific schema in the Semantic Web. Considering this fundamental difference, the authors propose a method for ranking Semantic Web resources independent of link directions and show the convergence of the algorithm and experimental results. This method focuses on the classes rather than the properties. The property weights are assigned depending on the relative significance of the property to the resource importance of each class. It solves some problems reported in prior studies, including the Tightly Knit Community TKC effect, as well as having higher accuracy and validity compared to existing methods.

References

[1]

Aleman-Meza, B., Halaschek-Wiener, C., Arpinar, I. B., Ramakrishnan, C., & Sheth, A. 2005. Ranking complex relationships on the Semantic Web. IEEE Internet Computing, 93, 37-44.

Digital Library

[2]

Aleman-Meza, B., Halaschek-Wiener, C., Arpinar, I. B., & Sheth, A. 2003. Context-aware semantic association ranking. In Proceedings of the Semantic Web and Database Workshop, Berlin pp. 33-50.

[3]

Anyanwu, K., Maduko, A., & Sheth, A. 2005. SemRank: Ranking complex relationship search results on the Semantic Web. In Proceedings of the International World Wide Web Conference Committee IW3C2, Chiba, Japan pp. 117-127.

Digital Library

[4]

Bamba, B., & Mukherjea, S. 2004. Utilizing resource importance for ranking Semantic Web query results. In C. Bussler et al. Eds., Proceedings of the Second Toronto International Workshop on Semantic Web Databases SWDB, Toronto, ON, Canada pp. 185-198. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

Digital Library

[5]

Berners-Lee, T. 2005. Semantic Web stack. Retrieved October 13, 2008, from http://www.w3.org/2005/Talks/0511-keynote-tbl/#{17}

[6]

Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, J., & Lassila, O. 2001. The Semantic Web. Scientific American Magazine. Retrieved March 26, 2008, from http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=the-semantic-web&print=true

[7]

Brickley, D., & Guha, R. V. Eds. 2004. RDF vocabulary description language 1.0: RDF schema. Retrieved October 15, 2008, from http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/

[8]

Brin, S., Motwani, R., Page, L., & Winograd, T. 1998. What can you do with a Web in your pocket. Bulletin of the IEEE Computer Society Technical Committee on Data Engineering, 212, 37-47.

[9]

Brin, S., & Page, L. 1998. The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual Web search engine. Special Issue of the 7th International World Wide Web Conference on Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, 301-7, 107-117.

Digital Library

[10]

Burden, R. L., & Faires, J. D. 2001. Numerical Analysis. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

[11]

Ding, L., Finin, T., Joshi, A., Pan, R., Cost, R. S., Peng, Y., et al. 2004. Swoogle: A semantic Web search and metadata engine. In Proceedings of the 13th ACM Conference on Information and Knowledge Management pp. 652-659.

Digital Library

[12]

Ding, L., Finin, T., Joshi, A., Peng, Y., Pan, R., & Reddivari, P. 2005. Search on the Semantic Web. Computer, 3810, 62-69.

Digital Library

[13]

Ding, L., Pan, R., Finin, T., Joshi, A., Peng, Y., & Kolari, P. 2005. Finding and ranking knowledge on the Semantic Web. In Proceedings of the 4th Galway IE International Semantic Web Conference, Galway, Ireland pp. 156-170. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

Digital Library

[14]

Ehrlich, L. W. 1969. Rate of Convergence Proofs of the Method for Finding Roots of Polynomials or Eigenvalues of Matrices by the Power and Inverse Power Methods Tech. Rep. No. AD707331. Alexandria, VA: National Technical Information Service.

[15]

Finin, T., & Ding, L. 2006. Search engines for Semantic Web knowledge. In Proceedings of XTech 2006: Building Web 2.0, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

[16]

Franz, T., Schultz, A., Sizov, S., & Staab, S. 2009. TripleRank: Ranking Semantic Web Data By Tensor Decomposition. In Proceedings of the 8th International Semantic Web Conference pp. 213-228. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

Digital Library

[17]

Golub, G., & Van Loan, C. F. 1989. Matrix Computations. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

[18]

Graves, A., Adali, S., & Hendler, J. 2008. A method to rank nodes in an RDF graph. In Proceedings of the 7th International Semantic Web Conference ISWC2008 Vol. 401. CEUR-WS.

[19]

Halaschek, C., Aleman-Meza, B., Arpinar, I. B., & Sheth, A. 2004. Discovering and ranking semantic associations over a large RDF metabase. In Proceedings of the 30th VLDB Conference, Toronto, ON, Canada pp. 1317-1320. VLDB Endowment.

Digital Library

[20]

Haveliwala, T. H. 1999. Efficient Computation of PageRank Tech. Rep. Stanford, CA: Stanford University.

[21]

Hurtado, C. A., Poulovassilis, A., & Wood, P. T. 2009. Ranking Approximate Answers to Semantic Web Queries. In Proceedings of the 6th European Semantic Web Conference pp. 263-277. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

Digital Library

[22]

Kleinberg, J. 1999. Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment. Journal of the ACM, 465, 604-632.

Digital Library

[23]

Klyne, G., & Carroll, J. Eds. 2004. Resource description framework RDF: Concepts and abstract syntax. Retrieved October 15, 2008, from http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/

[24]

Maedche, A., & Staab, S. 2002. Measuring similarity between ontologies. In Proceedings of the European Conference of Knowledge Acquisition and Management EKAW2002, Madrid, Spain LNCS 2473, pp. 15-21.

Digital Library

[25]

Maedche, A., Staab, S., Stojanovic, N., Studer, R., & Sure, Y. 2001. SEAL-A Framework for Developing SEmantic Web PortALs. In Advances in Databases LNCS 2097, pp. 1-22.

Digital Library

[26]

Manola, F., & Miller, E. Eds. 2004. RDF primer. Retrieved October 15, 2008, from http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-primer/

[27]

Marchiori, M. 1997. The quest for correct information on the Web: Hyper Search Engines. In Proceedings of the 6th International WWW Conference, Santa Clara, CA pp. 1225-1235. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier Science Publishers Ltd.

Digital Library

[28]

Mendenhall, W., Wackerly, D. D., & Scheaffer, R. L. 1990. Mathematical Statistics with Applications. Boston: PWS Publishers.

[29]

Mukherjea, S., & Bamba, B. 2004. BioPatentMiner: An information retrieval system for biomedical patents. In Proceedings of the 30th Toronto Conference on Very Large Databases VLDB pp. 1066-1077.

Digital Library

[30]

Mukherjea, S., Bamba, B., & Kankar, P. 2005. Information retrieval and knowledge discovery utilizing a biomedical patent Semantic Web. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 178, 1099-1110.

Digital Library

[31]

National Research Council. 2003. Assessing research-doctorate programs: A methodology study. Retrieved October 15, 2008, from http://www7.nationalacademies.org/resdoc/ranking_and_ratings.html

[32]

Page, L., Brin, S., Motwani, R., & Winograd, T. 1998. The PageRank Citation Ranking: Bringing Order to the Web Tech. Rep. No. SIDL-WP-1999-0120. Stanford, CA: Stanford University.

[33]

Perron & Frobenius. 2003. Perron-frobenius theory. Retrieved October 15, 2008, from http://www.win.tue.nl/~aeb/srgbk/node4.html

[34]

Prud'hommeaux, E., & Seaborne, A. Eds. 2007. SPARQL query language for RDF. Retrieved October 15, 2008, from http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/

[35]

Ren, J., & Taylor, R. N. 2007. Automatic and versatile publications ranking for research institutions and scholars. Communications of the ACM, 506, 81-85.

Digital Library

[36]

Schneider, P., Hayes, P., & Horrocks, I. Eds. 2004. OWL Web ontology language semantics and abstract syntax. Retrieved October 15, 2008, from http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/

[37]

Sheth, A., Aleman-Meza, B., Arpinar, I. B., Halaschek, C., & Ramakrishnan, C. 2005. Semantic association identification and knowledge discovery for national security applications. Journal of Database Management, 161, 33-53.

[38]

Wu, G., & Li, J. 2007. SWRank: An Approach for Ranking Semantic Web Reversely and Consistently. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Semantics, Knowledge and Grid SKG 2007 pp. 116-121.

Digital Library

Cited By

Menendez ECasanova MPaes Leme LBoughanem M(2019)Novel Node Importance Measures to Improve Keyword Search over RDF GraphsDatabase and Expert Systems Applications10.1007/978-3-030-27618-8_11(143-158)Online publication date: 26-Aug-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-030-27618-8_11
Poomagal SHamsapriya TVisalakshi P(2013)Semantic similarity-based PageRank using wordnetInternational Journal of Computer Applications in Technology10.1504/IJCAT.2013.05229246:2(101-112)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2013
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1504/IJCAT.2013.052292

Recommendations

Ranking web sites using domain ontology concepts

Many web search engines retrieve enormous amounts of irrelevant information in answer to users' queries. The semantic web provides a promising approach to improve search operation. For specific domains, ontologies can capture concepts to help machines ...
Development of Semantic Web applications: state of art and critical review
ICEMIS '18: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Engineering & MIS 2018

Ontologies have recently received popularity in the area of knowledge management and knowledge sharing, especially after the evolution of the Semantic Web and its supporting technologies. An ontology defines the terms and concepts (meaning) used to ...
Effective ranking and search techniques for Web resources considering semantic relationships

On the Semantic Web, the types of resources and the semantic relationships between resources are defined in an ontology. By using that information, the accuracy of information retrieval can be improved. In this paper, we present effective ranking and ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Journal of Database Management

Journal of Database Management Volume 22, Issue 1

January 2011

132 pages

ISSN:1063-8016

Issue’s Table of Contents

Publisher

IGI Global

United States

Publication History

Published: 01 January 2011

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

2
Total Citations
View Citations
0
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)0
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 30 Aug 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Menendez ECasanova MPaes Leme LBoughanem M(2019)Novel Node Importance Measures to Improve Keyword Search over RDF GraphsDatabase and Expert Systems Applications10.1007/978-3-030-27618-8_11(143-158)Online publication date: 26-Aug-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-3-030-27618-8_11
Poomagal SHamsapriya TVisalakshi P(2013)Semantic similarity-based PageRank using wordnetInternational Journal of Computer Applications in Technology10.1504/IJCAT.2013.05229246:2(101-112)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2013
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1504/IJCAT.2013.052292

View Options

View options

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents