Incremental Maintenance of Materialized Ontologies

  • Raphael Volz
  • Steffen Staab
  • Boris Motik
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2888)


This paper discusses the incremental maintenance of materialized ontologies in a rule-enabled Semantic Web. Materialization allows to speed up query processing by explicating the implicit entailments which are sanctioned by the semantics of an ontology. The complexity of reasoning with the ontology is thereby shifted from query time to update time. We assume that materialization techniques will frequently be important to achieve a scalable Semantic Web, since read access to ontologies is predominant. Central to materialization are maintenance techniques that allow to incrementally update a materialization when changes occur.

We present a novel solution that allows to cope with changes in rules and facts. To achieve this we extend a known approach for the incremental maintenance of views in deductive databases. We show how our technique can be employed for a broad range of existing Web ontology languages, such as RDF/S and subsets of OWL and present a first evaluation.


Query Processing Resource Description Framework Deductive Database Datalog Program Deletion Rule 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Apt, K., Pugin, J.-M.: Maintenance of stratified databases viewed as belief revision system. In: Proc. of the 6th Symposium on Principles of Database Systems (PODS), pp. 136–145, San Diego, CA, USA (March 1987)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bechhofer, S., Goble, C., Horrocks, I.: DAML+OIL is not enough. In: SWWS-1, Semantic Web working symposium (July/August 2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    de Kleer, J.: An assumption-based truth maintenance system. Artificial Intelligence 28, 127–162 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Decker, S., Brickley, D., Saarela, J., Angele, J.: A query and inference service for RDF. In: QL 1998 – Query Languages Workshop (December 1998)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Doyle, J.: A truth maintenance system. In: Webber, B., Nilsson, N.J. (eds.) Readings in Artifcial Intelligence, pp. 496–516. Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos (1981)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Grossof, B., Horrocks, I., Volz, R., Decker, S.: Description Logic Programs: Combining Logic Programs with Description Logic. In: Proceedings of WWW 2003, Budapest, Hungary (May 2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gupta, A., Mumick, I.S., Subrahmanian, V.S.: Maintaining views incrementally. In: ACM SIGMOD Conference on Management of Data (1993)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gupta, A., Mumick, I.S., Ross, K.A.: Adapting materialized views after redefinitions. In: Carey, M.J., Schneider, D.A. (eds.) Proceedings of the 1995 ACMSIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data, San Jose, California, May 22-25, pp. 211–222. ACM Press, New York (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Harrison, J., Dietrich, S.: Maintenance of materialized views in a deductive database: An update propagation approach. In: Workshop on Deductive Databases, JICSLP (1992)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hayes, P.: RDF Semantics. W3CWorking Draft, World-Wide Web Consortium (W3C) (January 2003),
  11. 11.
    Jarke, M., Gallersdoerfer, R., Jeusfeld, M.A., Staudt, M.: ConceptBase – A Deductive Object Base for Meta Data Management. JIIS 4(2), 167–192 (1995)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kuchenhoff, V.: On the efficient computation of the difference betwen consecutive database states. In: Delobel, C., Masunaga, Y., Kifer, M. (eds.) DOOD 1991. LNCS, vol. 566, pp. 478–502. Springer, Heidelberg (1991)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Levy, Y., Sagiv, Y.: Queries independent of updates. In: Proc. of 19th VLDB, pp. 171–181 (1993)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pandurang Nayak, P., Williams, B.C.: Fast Context Switching in Real-time Propositional Reasoning. In: Proceedings of AAAI 1997 (1997)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Patel-Schneider, P.F., Hayes, P., Horrocks, I., van Harmelen, F.: Web Ontology Language (OWL) Abstract Syntax and Semantics (2002),
  16. 16.
    De Roo, J.: Euler proof mechanism. Internet (2002),
  17. 17.
    Sintek, M., Decker, S.: TRIPLE – A Query, Inference, and Transformation Language for the SemanticWeb. In: International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC) (June 2002)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Staudt, M., Jarke, M.: Incremental maintenance of externally materialized views. Technical Report AIB-95-13, RWTH Aachen (1995)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Staudt, M., Jarke, M.: Incremental maintenance of externally materialized views. In: Vijayaraman, T.M., Buchmann, A.P., Mohan, C., Sarda, N.L. (eds.) VLDB 1996, Proceedings of 22th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases, Mumbai (Bombay), India, September 3-6, 1996, pp. 75–86. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1996)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yang, G., Kifer, M.: FLORA: Implementing an Efficient DOOD System Using a Tabling Logic Engine. In: Computational Logic 2000, pp. 1078–1093 (2000)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Raphael Volz
    • 1
    • 2
  • Steffen Staab
    • 1
  • Boris Motik
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute AIFBUniversity of KarlsruheKarlsruheGermany
  2. 2.WIMForschungszentrum Informatik (FZI)KarlsruheGermany

Personalised recommendations