Advertisement

A Reference Model for Semantic Peer-to-Peer Networks

  • Abdul-Rahman Mawlood-Yunis
  • Michael Weiss
  • Nicola Santoro
Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6720)

Abstract

Current research directions in Semantic Peer-to-Peer(SP2P) networks are evolving to combine two complementary technologies: Peer-to-Peer(P2P) networks and formally-structured information, Ontology. SP2P systems incorporate several additional features not present in P2P networks. However, the current SP2P research efforts have generated many and diverse realizations and architectures. This diversity in implementation and architecture in turn has led to an ambiguity and incompatibility in defining domain abstracts and concepts and as such has hampered progress in this area. For instance, system comparison as well as their translation into practical implementation have been hindered. In this work, we describe a reference model for SP2P systems in an effort to model the emerging decentralized computing paradigm in a generic and high level abstraction. The potential contribution of the reference model to the advancement of the current SP2P systems spans various areas. These include: 1) an establishment of common terminologies for the domain. This leads to better understanding and communication among members of the community. 2) providing guidelines for comparison among individual systems. Individual systems could be compared with each other in terms of their compliance with the generic model, and their implementation of the generic features.

Keywords

System modeling and architecture Ontology Semantic overlay networks P2P Information system 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Aberer, K., Alima, L.O., Ghodsi, A., Girdzijauskas, S., Haridi, S., Hauswirth, M.: The essence of P2P: a reference architecture for overlay networks. In: Proc. Fifth IEEE International Conference on P2P Computing, pp. 11–20 (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aberer, K., Cudré-Mauroux, P., Hauswirth, M., Van Pelt, T.: GridVine: Building Internet-Scale Semantic Overlay Networks. In: McIlraith, S.A., Plexousakis, D., van Harmelen, F. (eds.) ISWC 2004. LNCS, vol. 3298, pp. 107–121. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aberer, K., Cudré-Mauroux, P., Hauswirth, M.: Start making sense: The Chatty Web approach for global semantic agreements. Journal of Web Semantics 1(1), 89–114 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    An, Y., Borgida, A., Mylopulos, J.: Discovery and maintaining Semantic Mappings between XML Schemas and Ontologies. Journal of Computing Science and Engineering 2(1), 44–73 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bianchini, D., De Antonellis, V., Melchiori, M., Salvi, D., Bianchini, D.: Peer-to-peer semantic-based web service discovery: state of the art, Technical Report, Dipartimento di Elettronica per l’Automazione Università di Brescia (2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bonifacio, M., Bouquet, P., Mameli, G., Nori, M.: Peer-mediated distributed knowledge management. In: van Elst, L., Dignum, V., Abecker, A. (eds.) AMKM 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2926, pp. 31–47. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bouquet, P., Donà, A., Scrafini, L., Zanobini, S.: ConTcXtualizcd Local Ontology Specification via CTXML. In: AAAI Workshop on Meaning Negotiation, pp. 64–72 (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Castano, S., Ferrara, A., Montanelli, S.: H-Match: an Algorithm for Dynamically Matching Ontologies in Peer-based Systems. In: The 1st VLDB Int. Workshop on Semantic Web and Databases (SWDB), pp. 231–250 (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Castano, S., Montanelli, S.: Enforcing a Semantic Routing Mechanism based on Peer Context Matching. In: Proc. of the 2nd Int. ECAI Workshop on Contexts and Ontologies: Theory, Practice and Applications (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Choi, N., Song, I., Han, H.: A survey on ontology mapping. SIGMOD Rec. 35(3), 34–41 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Colazzo, D., Sartiani, C.: Mapping Maintenance in XML P2P Databases. In: Bierman, G., Koch, C. (eds.) DBPL 2005. LNCS, vol. 3774, pp. 74–89. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dabek, F., Brunskill, E., Kaashoek, M.F., Karger, D.: Building peer-to-peer systems with Chord, a distributed lookup service. In: Proc. 8th Wshop. Hot Topics in Operating Syst. (HOTOS-VIII) (May 2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dabek, F., Zhao, B., Druschel, P., Kubiatowicz, J., Stoica, I.: Towards a Common API for Structured Peer-to-Peer Overlays. In: Kaashoek, M.F., Stoica, I. (eds.) IPTPS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2735. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Doulkeridis, C., Vlachou, A., Nørvåg, K., Kotidis, Y., Vazirgiannis, M.: Efficient search based on content similarity over self-organizing P2P networks. Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications Journal (2010), doi:10.1007/s12083-009-0058-2Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ehrig, M.: Ontology alignment: bridging the semantic gap. Springer publishing, Heidelberg (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Euzenat, J., Shvaiko, P.: Ontology matching. Springer publishing, Heidelberg (2007)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fergus, P., Mingkhwan, A., Merabti, M., Hanneghan, M.: Distributed emergent semantics in P2P networks. In: Proc. of the Second IASTED International Conference on Information and Knowledge Sharing, pp. 75-82 (2003)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Franconi, E., Kuper, G., Lopatenko, A., Zaihrayeu, I.: Queries and updates in the coDB peer to peer database system. In: Proc. of 30th International Conference on Very Large Databases VLDB 2004, pp. 1277–1280 (2004)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
  20. 20.
    Guarino, N.: Formal ontology and information systems. In: Proc. of Formal Ontology in Information Systems, pp. 3–15 (1998)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gruber, T.R.: The Role of Common Ontology in Achieving Sharable, Reusable Knowledge Bases. In: Proc. of the 2nd International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pp. 601–602 (1991)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
  23. 23.
    Haase, P., Broekstra, J., Ehrig, M., Menken, M.R., Mika, P., Olko, M., Plechawski, M., Pyszlak, P., Schnizler, B., Siebes, R., Staab, S., Tempich, C.: Bibster – A Semantics-based Bibliographic Peer-to-Peer System. In: McIlraith, S.A., Plexousakis, D., van Harmelen, F. (eds.) ISWC 2004. LNCS, vol. 3298, pp. 122–136. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Haase, P., Siebes, R., van Harmelen, F.: Peer Selection in Peer-to-Peer Networks with Semantic Topologies. In: Bouzeghoub, M., Goble, C.A., Kashyap, V., Spaccapietra, S. (eds.) ICSNW 2004. LNCS, vol. 3226, pp. 108–125. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hai, Z., Liu, J., Feng, L., Sun, X., He, C.: Query Routing in a Peer-to-Peer Semantic Link Network. Computational Intelligence 21(2), 197–216 (2005)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Halevy, A., Ives, Z., Mork, P., Tatarinov, I.: Piazza: Mediation and integration infrastructure for semantic web data. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 2(1), 155–175 (2004)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
  28. 28.
  29. 29.
  30. 30.
    Joseph, S.: Neurogrid: Semantically Routing Queries in Peer-to-Peer Networks. In: Proc. Intl. Workshop on Peer-to-Peer Computing (2002)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kang, K.: Feature-Oriented Domain Analysis. Technical Report No. CMU/SEI-90-TR-21, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA (1990)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kementsietsidis, A., Arenas, M., Miller, R.: Managing Data Mappings in the Hyperion Project. In: Proc.of the 19th Intl. Conf. on Data Engineering, pp. 732–734 (2003)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Liu, L., Xu, J., Russell, D., Antonopoulos, N.: Self-Organization of Autonomous Peers with Human Strategies. In: Proc. of ICIW 2008, pp. 348–357 (2008)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Löser, A., Staab, S., Tempich, C.: Semantic social overlay networks. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications 25(1), 5–14 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Mawlood-Yunis, A.-R., Weiss, M., Santoro, N.: From P2P to Reliable Semantic P2P Systems. Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications Journal, special issue, 1–19 (2010), doi:10.1007/s12083-009-0066-2Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Mawlood-Yunis, A.-R., Weiss, M., Santoro, N.: Reference Model for Semantic Peer-to-Peer Networks. In: Babin, G., Kropf, P., Weiss, M. (eds.) E-Technologies: Innovation in an Open World. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol. 26, pp. 319–334. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Mawlood-Yunis, A.-R., Weiss, M., Santoro, N.: Fault-Tolerant Emergent Semantics in P2P Networks. In: Cardoso, J., Lytras, M. (eds.) Semantic Web Engineering in the Knowledge Society, pp. 161–187. IGI Global (2008)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Mccann, R., Alshebli, B., Le, Q., Nguyen, H., Vu, L., Doan, A.: Mapping maintenance for data integration systems. In: Proc. of the 31st International Conference on VLDB, pp. 1018–1029 (2005)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    McDougall, P.: The power of peer-to-peer. Information week (August 28, 2000), http://www.informationWeek.com
  40. 40.
    Mena, E., Illarramendi, A., Kashyap, V., Sheth, A.P.: OBSERVER: an approach for query processing in global information systems based on interpretation across pre-existing ontologies. Distributed and Parallel Databases 8(2), 223–271 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
  42. 42.
    Nejdl, W., Wolf, B., Qu, C., Decker, S., Sintek, M., Naeve, A., Nilsson, M., Palmér, M., Risch, T.: EDUTELLA: a P2P networking infrastructure based on RDF. In: Proc. of the 11th International Conference on World Wide Web, pp. 604–615 (2002)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Ng, W.S., Ooi, B.C., Tan, K.-L., Zhou, A.: PeerDB: a P2P-based system for distributed data sharing. In: Proc. of 19th International Conference on Data Engineering, pp. 633–644 (2003)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Oram, A. (ed.): Peer-to-Peer: harnessing the power of Disruptive Technologies. O’Reilly and Associates, Inc. publishing, Sebastopol (2001)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Parashar, M., Member, S., Browns, J.C.: Conceptual and Implementation Models for the Grid. Proc. of IEEE Journal 93(3), 653–668 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Rowstron, A., Druschel, P.: Pastry: Scalable, decentralized object location, and routing for large-scale peer-to-peer systems. In: Liu, H. (ed.) Middleware 2001. LNCS, vol. 2218, pp. 329–350. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Rousset, M., Chatalic, P., Adjiman, P., Chatalic, P., Goasdoue, F., Simon, L.: Somewhere in the Semantic Web. In: Intl. Workshop on Principles and Practice of Semantic Web Reasoning, pp. 84–99 (2006)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Schmitz, C., Löser, A.: How to model Semantic Peer-to-Peer Overlays? In: Proc. P2PIR Workshop, Informatik, vol. (1), pp. 12–19 (2006)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Staab, S., Stuckenschmidt, S.: Semantic Web and Peer-to-Peer. Springer Publishing, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Tempich, C., Staab, S., Wranik, A.: Distributed semantic query: Remindin’: semantic query routing in peer-to-peer networks based on social metaphors. In: Proc. of the 13th International Conference on World Wide Web, pp. 640–649 (2004)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Voulgaris, S., Kermarrec, A., Massoulié, L., van Steen, M.: Exploring Semantic Proximity in Peer-to-Peer Content search. In: 10th International Workshop on Futeru Trends in Distriubed Computing Systems (2004)Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Zaihrayeu, I.: Towards Peer-to-Peer Information Management Systems. PhD Dissertation, International Doctorate School in Information and Communication Technologies, DIT - University of Trento (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Abdul-Rahman Mawlood-Yunis
    • 1
  • Michael Weiss
    • 2
  • Nicola Santoro
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Computer ScienceCarleton UniversityCanada
  2. 2.Department of Systems and Computer EngineeringCarleton UniversityOttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations