Advertisement

A Decentralized Architecture for Sharing and Querying Semantic Data

  • Christian AebeloeEmail author
  • Gabriela Montoya
  • Katja Hose
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11503)

Abstract

Although the Semantic Web in principle provides access to a vast Web of interlinked data, the full potential remains mostly unexploited. One of the main reasons for this is the fact that the architecture of the current Web of Data relies on a set of servers providing access to the data. These servers represent bottlenecks and single points of failure that result in instability and unavailability of data at certain points in time. In this paper, we therefore propose a decentralized architecture (Piqnic) for sharing and querying semantic data. By combining both client and server functionality at each participating node, and introducing replication, Piqnic avoids bottlenecks and keeps datasets available and queryable although the original source might not be available. Our experimental results, using a standard benchmark of real datasets, show that Piqnic can serve as an architecture for sharing and querying semantic data, even in the presence of node failures.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was partially funded by the Danish Council for Independent Research (DFF) under grant agreement no. DFF-8048-00051B & DFF-4093-00301B and Aalborg University’s Talent Programme.

References

  1. 1.
    Adar, E., Huberman, B.A.: Free riding on Gnutella. First Monday 5, 10 (2000).  https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v5i10.792CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Buil-Aranda, C., Hogan, A., Umbrich, J., Vandenbussche, P.-Y.: SPARQL web-querying infrastructure: ready for action? In: Alani, H., et al. (eds.) ISWC 2013. LNCS, vol. 8219, pp. 277–293. Springer, Heidelberg (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41338-4_18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cai, M., Frank, M.R.: RDFPeers: a scalable distributed RDF repository based on a structured peer-to-peer network. In: WWW, pp. 650–657 (2004).  https://doi.org/10.1145/988672.988760
  4. 4.
    Fernández, J.D., Martínez-Prieto, M.A., Gutiérrez, C., Polleres, A., Arias, M.: Binary RDF representation for publication and exchange (HDT). J. Web Semant. 19, 22–41 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Folz, P., Skaf-Molli, H., Molli, P.: CyCLaDEs: a decentralized cache for triple pattern fragments. In: Sack, H., Blomqvist, E., d’Aquin, M., Ghidini, C., Ponzetto, S.P., Lange, C. (eds.) ESWC 2016. LNCS, vol. 9678, pp. 455–469. Springer, Cham (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-34129-3_28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Grall, A., et al.: Ladda: SPARQL queries in the fog of browsers. In: Blomqvist, E., Hose, K., Paulheim, H., Ławrynowicz, A., Ciravegna, F., Hartig, O. (eds.) ESWC 2017. LNCS, vol. 10577, pp. 126–131. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70407-4_24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Grall, A., Skaf-Molli, H., Molli, P.: SPARQL query execution in networks of web browsers. In: DeSemWeb@ISWC (2018)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Grubenmann, T., Bernstein, A., Moor, D., Seuken, S.: Financing the web of data with delayed-answer auctions. In: WWW, pp. 1033–1042 (2018)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hartig, O., Buil-Aranda, C.: Bindings-restricted triple pattern fragments. In: Debruyne, C., et al. (eds.) OTM 2016. LNCS, vol. 10033, pp. 762–779. Springer, Cham (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48472-3_48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hasnain, A., Saleem, M., Ngomo, A.N., Rebholz-Schuhmann, D.: Extending LargeRDFBench for multi-source data at scale for SPARQL endpoint federation. In: SSWS (2018)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kaoudi, Z., Koubarakis, M., Kyzirakos, K., Miliaraki, I., Magiridou, M., Papadakis-Pesaresi, A.: Atlas: storing, updating and querying RDF(S) data on top of DHTs. J. Web Semant. 8(4), 271–277 (2010).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.websem.2010.07.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Karnstedt, M., et al.: UniStore: querying a DHT-based universal storage. In: ICDE, pp. 1503–1504 (2007).  https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDE.2007.369054
  13. 13.
    Mahdisoltani, F., Biega, J., Suchanek, F.M.: YAGO3: a knowledge base from multilingual Wikipedias. In: CIDR (2013)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mansour, E., et al.: A demonstration of the solid platform for social web applications, In: WWW Companion, pp. 223–226 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1145/2872518.2890529
  15. 15.
    Marx, E., Saleem, M., Lytra, I., Ngomo, A.N.: A decentralized architecture for SPARQL query processing and RDF sharing: a position paper. In: ICSC, pp. 274–277 (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSC.2018.00049
  16. 16.
    Minier, T., Skaf-Molli, H., Molli, P., Vidal, M.-E.: Intelligent clients for replicated triple pattern fragments. In: Gangemi, A., et al. (eds.) ESWC 2018. LNCS, vol. 10843, pp. 400–414. Springer, Cham (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93417-4_26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Molli, P., Skaf-Molli, H.: Semantic web in the fog of browsers. In: DeSemWeb@ISWC (2017)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Montoya, G., Aebeloe, C., Hose, K.: Towards efficient query processing over heterogeneous RDF interfaces. In: DeSemWeb@ISWC (2018)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Montoya, G., Skaf-Molli, H., Hose, K.: The Odyssey approach for optimizing federated SPARQL queries. In: d’Amato, C., et al. (eds.) ISWC 2017. LNCS, vol. 10587, pp. 471–489. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68288-4_28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Polleres, A., Kamdar, M.R., Fernández, J.D., Tudorache, T., Musen, M.A.: A more decentralized vision for linked data. In: DeSemWeb@ISWC (2018)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Schmidt, M., Görlitz, O., Haase, P., Ladwig, G., Schwarte, A., Tran, T.: FedBench: a benchmark suite for federated semantic data query processing. In: Aroyo, L., et al. (eds.) ISWC 2011. LNCS, vol. 7031, pp. 585–600. Springer, Heidelberg (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25073-6_37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Verborgh, R., et al.: Triple pattern fragments: a low-cost knowledge graph interface for the web. J. Web Semant. 37–38, 184–206 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.websem.2016.03.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Voulgaris, S., Gavidia, D., van Steen, M.: CYCLON: inexpensive membership management for unstructured P2P overlays. J. Netw. Syst. Manage. 13(2), 197–217 (2005).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10922-005-4441-xCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Aalborg UniversityAalborgDenmark

Personalised recommendations