A Complete Life-Cycle for the Semantic Enrichment of Folksonomies

  • Freddy LimpensEmail author
  • Fabien Gandon
  • Michel Buffa
Part of the Studies in Computational Intelligence book series (SCI, volume 471)


Tags freely provided by users of social tagging services are not explicitly semantically linked, and this significantly hinders the possibilities for browsing and exploring these data. On the other hand, folksonomies provide great opportunities to bootstrap the construction of thesauri. We propose an approach to semantic enrichment of folksonomies that integrates both automatic processing and user input, while formally supporting multiple points of view. We take into account the social structure of our target communities to integrate the folksonomy enrichment process into everyday tasks. Our system allows individual users to navigate more efficiently within folksonomies, and also to maintain their own structure of tags while benefiting from others contributions. Our approach brings also solutions to the bottleneck problem of knowledge acquisition by helping communities to build thesauri by integrating the manifold contributions of all their members, thus providing for a truly socio-semantic solution to folksonomy enrichment and thesauri construction.


Referent User Semantic Relation Compound Word SPARQL Query Spelling Variant 
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. [Angeletou et al., 2008]
    Angeletou, S., Sabou, M., Motta, E.: Semantically Enriching Folksonomies with FLOR. In: CISWeb Workshop at European Semantic Web Conference ESWC (2008)Google Scholar
  2. [Aussenac-Gilles et al., 2000]
    Aussenac-Gilles, N., Biébow, B., Szulman, S.: Corpus analysis for conceptual modelling. In: 12th International Conference Workshop on Ontologies and Texts at Knowledge Acquisition, Modeling and Management, EKAW 2000 (2000)Google Scholar
  3. [Bouquet et al., 2004]
    Bouquet, P., Giunchiglia, F., van Harmelen, F., Serafini, L., Stuckenschmidt, H.: Contextualizing ontologies. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 1(4), 325–343 (2004); International Semantic Web Conference 2003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [Braun et al., 2007]
    Braun, S., Schmidt, A., Walter, A., Nagypál, G., Zacharias, V.: Ontology maturing: a collaborative web 2.0 approach to ontology engineering. In: CKC. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 273. (2007)Google Scholar
  5. [Buffa et al., 2008]
    Buffa, M., Gandon, F., Ereteo, G., Sander, P., Faron, C.: SweetWiki: A semantic Wiki. J. Web Sem., Special Issue on Web 2.0 and the Semantic Web 6(1), 84–97 (2008)Google Scholar
  6. [Carroll et al., 2005]
    Carroll, J.J., Bizer, C., Hayes, P., Stickler, P.: Named graphs, provenance and trust. In: WWW 2005: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on World Wide Web, pp. 613–622. ACM, New York (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [Cattuto et al., 2008]
    Cattuto, C., Benz, D., Hotho, A., Stumme, G.: Semantic Grounding of Tag Relatedness in Social Bookmarking Systems. In: Sheth, A.P., Staab, S., Dean, M., Paolucci, M., Maynard, D., Finin, T., Thirunarayan, K. (eds.) ISWC 2008. LNCS, vol. 5318, pp. 615–631. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [Ereteo et al., 2009]
    Erétéo, G., Buffa, M., Gandon, F., Corby, O.: Analysis of a Real Online Social Network Using Semantic Web Frameworks. In: Bernstein, A., Karger, D.R., Heath, T., Feigenbaum, L., Maynard, D., Motta, E., Thirunarayan, K. (eds.) ISWC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5823, pp. 180–195. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [Gandon et al., 2007]
    Gandon, F., Bottolier, V., Corby, O., Durville, P.: Rdf/xml source declaration, w3c member submission (2007),
  10. [Golebiowska, 2002]
    Golebiowska, J.: Exploitation des ontologies pour la memoire d’un projet-vehicule - Methode et outil SAMOVAR. PhD thesis, Universite de Nice-Sophia Antipolis (2002)Google Scholar
  11. [Heymann and Garcia-Molina, 2006]
    Heymann, P., Garcia-Molina, H.: Collaborative Creation of Communal Hierarchical Taxonomies in Social Tagging Systems. Technical report, Stanford InfoLab (2006)Google Scholar
  12. [Huynh-Kim Bang et al., 2008]
    Huynh-Kim Bang, B., Dané, E., Grandbastien, M.: Merging semantic and participative approaches for organising teachers’ documents. In: Proceedings of ED-Media 2008 ED-MEDIA 2008 - World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications, Vienna France, pp. 4959–4966 (2008)Google Scholar
  13. [Levenshtein, 1966]
    Levenshtein, V.I.: Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions and reversals. Soviet Physics Doklady 10(8), 707–710 (1966)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. [Limpens et al., 2009]
    Limpens, F., Monnin, A., Laniado, D., Gandon, F.: Nicetag ontology: tags as named graphs. In: International Workshop in Social Networks Interoperability, Asian Semantic Web Conference 2009 (2009)Google Scholar
  15. [Markines et al., 2009]
    Markines, B., Cattuto, C., Menczer, F., Benz, D., Hotho, A., Stumme, G.: Evaluating similarity measures for emergent semantics of social tagging. In: 18th International World Wide Web Conference, pp. 641–641 (2009)Google Scholar
  16. [Mika, 2005]
    Mika, P.: Ontologies Are Us: A Unified Model of Social Networks and Semantics. In: Gil, Y., Motta, E., Benjamins, V.R., Musen, M.A. (eds.) ISWC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3729, pp. 522–536. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [Passant and Laublet, 2008]
    Passant, A., Laublet, P.: Meaning of a tag: A collaborative approach to bridge the gap between tagging and linked data. In: Proceedings of the WWW 2008 Workshop Linked Data on the Web (LDOW 2008), Beijing, China (2008)Google Scholar
  18. [Peron, 2009]
    Peron, S.: Etude ergonomique de folkon. Technical report, UNSA, INRIA (2009)Google Scholar
  19. [Ribière, 1999]
    Ribière, M.: Représentation et gestion de multiples points de vue dans le formalisme des graphes conceptuels. PhD thesis, Université Nice-Sophia Antipolis (1999)Google Scholar
  20. [Specia and Motta, 2007]
    Specia, L., Motta, E.: Integrating Folksonomies with the Semantic Web. In: Franconi, E., Kifer, M., May, W. (eds.) ESWC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4519, pp. 624–639. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [Tanasescu and Streibel, 2007]
    Tanasescu, V., Streibel, O.: Extreme tagging: Emergent semantics through the tagging of tags. In: Haase, P., Hotho, A., Chen, L., Ong, E., Mauroux, P.C. (eds.) Proceedings of the International Workshop on Emergent Semantics and Ontology Evolution (ESOE 2007) at ISWC/ASWC 2007, Busan, South Korea (2007)Google Scholar
  22. [Van Damme et al., 2007]
    Van Damme, C., Hepp, M., Siorpaes, K.: Folksontology: An integrated approach for turning folksonomies into ontologies. In: Bridging the Gep between Semantic Web and Web 2.0 (SemNet 2007), pp. 57–70 (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Edelweiss - INRIASophia AntipolisFrance
  2. 2.I3S - CNRS / University of NiceSophia AntipolisFrance

Personalised recommendations