A multiplatform energy-aware OWL reasoner benchmarking framework
Section snippets
Overview and motivation
One of the fundamental standards underpinning the Semantic Web is the Web Ontology Language (OWL), currently at version 2 [1]. It is used to create ontologies, i.e., vocabularies endowed with a formal meaning which grounds terminological characterizations. OWL 2 semantics are based on the Description Logic (DL), a fragment of First Order Logic (FOL).
Automated reasoning is a process to infer implicit knowledge from what has been explicitly declared in an ontology, and to answer specific
Preliminaries
In the semantics of OWL, basic elements include: classes (14concepts in DL jargon), representing sets of objects; object properties (14roles), linking pairs of objects; data properties (14functional roles on concrete domains), linking objects with data values (14 literals); individuals (14instances), representing specific objects. These elements can be combined using constructors to form class expressions, which can be used in sets of inclusion assertions and definitions called TBoxes
Case study: benchmarking ontology classification and consistency
evOWLuator is a multiplatform software framework devised to assess the correctness, performance and energy footprint of inference services exposed by OWL reasoners. In order to promote its adoption in both academic and industrial contexts, it is released under the Eclipse Public License (EPL) version 2.0.3
A small experimental campaign has been carried out to validate evOWLuator’s effectiveness and features as well as to
OWL reasoner evaluation framework
evOWLuator has been designed with flexibility in mind, particularly concerning the ability to test multiple reasoning engines and the capability to run inference services on mobile and embedded devices.
To achieve these goals, evOWLuator follows the object-oriented paradigm: user configuration involves extending Python abstract base classes in the framework with concrete subclasses implementing their parents’ interfaces. Compared to a declarative solution, e.g., structured configuration files,
Related work
Approximately until 2010, reasoner evaluation has been dominated by benchmarks based on a relatively low number of ontologies and small sets of hand-crafted queries [28]. The Lehigh University Benchmark (LUBM) [29] is one of the most representative and popular specimens: it consists of one ontology on the domain of universities, fourteen extensional queries testing several properties, and a synthetic data generator to create scalable ABoxes. In [30] LUBM was used together with other three
Conclusion
This paper has proposed a novel multi-platform and energy-aware framework for OWL reasoner benchmarking. The first release allows evaluating correctness, performance (time and memory peak) and energy footprint of a set of standard and non-standard reasoning tasks. Support for both desktop and mobile platforms, scalability and flexibility are some of the most relevant core features. Automatic report generation in tabular and plot forms facilitates the presentation of experimental outcomes.
Future
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Floriano Scioscia: Conception and design of study, Acquisition of data, Analysis and/or interpretation of data, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Ivano Bilenchi: Conception and design of study, Acquisition of data, Analysis and/or interpretation of data, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Michele Ruta: Conception and design of study, Acquisition of data, Analysis and/or interpretation of data, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Filippo
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
All authors approved the version of the manuscript to be published.
Funding
This work has been supported by Italian Ministry of Economic Development R&D project BARIUM5G (Blockchain and ARtificial Intelligence for Ubiquitous coMputing via 5G) and by Italian PON project RPASInAir (Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems Integration in non-segregated Air space for services).
Intellectual property
We confirm that we have given due consideration to the protection of intellectual property associated with this work and that there are no impediments to publication, including the timing of publication, with respect to intellectual property. In so doing we confirm that we have followed the regulations of our institutions concerning intellectual property.
References (39)
- et al.
Multi-criteria analysis for OS-EMR software selection problem: A comparative study
Decis. Support Syst.
(2015) - et al.
Semantic reasoning on mobile devices: Do androids dream of efficient reasoners?
J. Web Semant.
(2015) - et al.
Konclude: system description
J. Web Semant.
(2014) - et al.
Pellet: A practical OWL-DL reasoner
J. Web Semant.
(2007) - et al.
LUBM: A Benchmark for OWL knowledge base systems
Web Semant.: Sci., Serv. Agents World Wide Web
(2005) - et al.
OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Primer, W3C Recommendation
(2012) SPARQL 1.1 Overview, W3C Recommendation
(2013)- et al.
A survey of current, stand-alone OWL reasoners
- et al.
Building a Semantic Web of Things: issues and perspectives in information compression
- et al.
SPITFIRE: Toward a Semantic Web of Things
IEEE Commun. Mag.
(2011)
Semantic Web of Things: an analysis of the application semantics for the IoT moving towards the IoT convergence
Int. J. Web Grid Serv.
Automatic knowledge extraction to build Semantic Web of Things applications
IEEE Internet Things J.
Mobile Edge Computing: A survey
IEEE Internet Things J.
Embedded + reasoning on programmable logic controllers
Semantic challenges for the variety and velocity dimensions of Big Data
Int. J. Semant. Web Inf. Syst.
Mini-ME Swift: the first OWL reasoner for iOS
Mini-ME matchmaker and reasoner for the Semantic Web of Things
What is an ontology?
The Description Logic Handbook
Cited by (8)
Future data center energy-conservation and emission-reduction technologies in the context of smart and low-carbon city construction
2023, Sustainable Cities and SocietyCitation Excerpt :The energy consumption of switches accounts for approximately 15% of the IT equipment (Moazamigoodarzi, Gupta, & Pal, 2020). A 48-port switch consumes approximately 116–190 watts when fully loaded (Scioscia, Bilenchi, & Ruta, 2022). As can be seen, reducing energy consumption in DC by adjusting the transfer rate of the switch ports is inefficient.
A multiplatform reasoning engine for the Semantic Web of Everything
2022, Journal of Web SemanticsCitation Excerpt :An early experimental campaign has been carried out to evaluate the computational performance of Tiny-ME in Ontology Classification and non-standard inference tasks. Tests have been executed on desktop and mobile platforms by means of the evOWLuator [48] framework.24 The desktop testbed is an Apple Mac Mini (2014)25, while mobile tests have been carried out on an Apple iPhone 726, and a HTC/Google Nexus 9 tablet.27
Tiny-ME Wasm: Description Logics Reasoning in Your Browser
2024, Communications in Computer and Information ScienceConstruction of Learning Process Ontology and Application of SWRL Rules
2023, 16th International Conference on Advanced Computer Theory and Engineering, ICACTE 2023A Performance Evaluation of OWL 2 DL Reasoners using ORE 2015 and Very Large Bio Ontologies
2023, CEUR Workshop Proceedings