2012 IEEE Sixth International Conference on Semantic Computing 2012
DOI: 10.1109/icsc.2012.50
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Improving Semantic Queries by Utilizing UNL Ontology and a Graph Database

Abstract: This paper describes an approach for improving semantic queries by utilizing Universal Words (UWs) and a graph database. Concept Description Language (CDL) is used for representing the semantic data, and Neo4j graph database is used as the storage back-end. Cypher graph query language is used as the basis for implementing the semantic queries. For improving the queries, query expansion is performed by utilizing semantic relationships between UWs provided by UNL Ontology.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The often-used format for ontology representation is the resource description framework [32,33], sometimes extended by the web ontology language [27,29]. Articles devoted to identifying "relatedness" of concepts to each other using the path between them do not cover the weighted approach [29,30,34,35]. However, in [36] the authors raise the issue of using the weighted approach for text categorization, whereas each document is considered as a graph to apply a categorization algorithm.…”
Section: Related Literaturementioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The often-used format for ontology representation is the resource description framework [32,33], sometimes extended by the web ontology language [27,29]. Articles devoted to identifying "relatedness" of concepts to each other using the path between them do not cover the weighted approach [29,30,34,35]. However, in [36] the authors raise the issue of using the weighted approach for text categorization, whereas each document is considered as a graph to apply a categorization algorithm.…”
Section: Related Literaturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Most current work in the literature is rather focused on contextual representation, considering "relatedness" identification rather than semantic similarity [33], which allows interrelating the concepts without a need for predefined knowledge about synonyms, hyponyms, or meronymy. For instance, in [35] the authors solely target the issue of finding the hyponyms in a specific ontology, which limits the approach to a specific ontology containing specific relation types. The issue of importing ontologies is raised in several works (e.g., [29,31,37]), whereas in [38], the authors propose to use a graph database as a "hub" to aggregate the data for further analysis.…”
Section: Related Literaturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The part of the Neo4j storage engine that stores properties is known as the PropertyStore. In general, Neo4j database allows storing data as nodes connected by arcs [27]. Neo4j have been used to implement social graph databases.…”
Section: Social Graph Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is due to the minimal research on ontology using Neo4j with excellence as a tool for graph database, ontology and semantic. Kivikangas [10] described that Semantic data is easily represented as graphs, provides graph database more natural abstraction for such data than relational database. While Miller [11] said that the graph databases have a natural application to biology, semantics, network systems, and recommender who require this type of data model only they can offer.Graph database is also described by Malhotra [12] as the evolution of technical knowledge representation based on semantic web.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%