University of Economics, Prague, W. Churchill Sq. 1938/4, 130 67 Prague 3 - Žižkov, Czech Republic; e-mail: marek.dudas@vse.cz svatek@vse.cz"/> IITMO University, 49 Kronverksky Pr., St. Petersburg, 197101, Russia e-mail: dmitry.pavlov@vismart.biz"/>
Search
  • All Journals
Advanced Search
Search articles by Title, Author, Keywords, DOI
Submit Manuscript
7.7CiteScore
2.0Impact Factor
Advanced Search
MAP  >  The Knowledge Engineering Review
2018 Volume 33
Article Contents
Next Previous
RESEARCH ARTICLE   Open Access    

Ontology visualization methods and tools: a survey of the state of the art

  • 1.

    University of Economics, Prague, W. Churchill Sq. 1938/4, 130 67 Prague 3 - Žižkov, Czech Republic; e-mail: marek.dudas@vse.cz svatek@vse.cz

  • 2.

    Fraunhofer Institute for Intelligent Analysis and Information Systems (IAIS), Schloss Birlinghoven, 53757

  • 3.

    IITMO University, 49 Kronverksky Pr., St. Petersburg, 197101, Russia e-mail: dmitry.pavlov@vismart.biz

More Information
  • Abstract: Various ontology visualization tools using different visualization methods exist and new ones are being developed every year. The goal of this paper is to follow up on previous surveys with an updated classification of ontology visualization methods and a comprehensive survey of available tools. The tools are analyzed for the used visualization methods, interaction techniques and supported ontology constructs. It shows that most of the tools apply two-dimensional node-link visualizations with a focus on class hierarchies. Color and shape are used with little variation, support for constructs introduced with version 2 of the OWL Web Ontology Language is limited, and it often remains vague what tasks and use cases are supported by the visualizations. Major challenges are the limited maturity and usability of many of the tools as well as providing an overview of large ontologies while also showing details on demand. We see a high demand for a universal ontology visualization framework implementing a core set of visual and interactive features that can be extended and customized to respective use cases.
  • 加载中
  • Alani H. 2003. TGVizTab: an ontology visualisation extension for Protege. In K-Cap’03 Workshop on Visualization Information in Knowledge Engineering.

    Google Scholar

    Bach B., Pietriga E., Liccardi I. & Legostaev G. 2011. OntoTrix: a hybrid visualization for populated ontologies. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference Companion on World Wide Web, 177-180. ACM.

    Google Scholar

    Bārzdiņš J., Bārzdiņš G., Čerāns K., Liepiņš R. & Sprog´is A. 2010. OWLGrEd: a UML style graphical notation and editor for OWL 2. In Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop OWL: Experience and Directions (OWLED-2010), CEUR WS 614. CEUR-WS.org.

    Google Scholar

    Bertin J. 1983. Semiology of Graphics: Diagrams, Networks, Maps, Berg, W.J. (trans). University of Wisconsin Press.

    Google Scholar

    Borst W. N. 1997. Construction of engineering ontologies for knowledge sharing and reuse, Universiteit Twente.

    Google Scholar

    Bosca A., Bonino D. & Pellegrino P. 2005. OntoSphere: more than a 3D ontology visualization tool. In SWAP, the 2nd Italian Semantic Web Workshop.

    Google Scholar

    Burch M. & Lohmann S. 2015. Visualizing the evolution of ontologies: a dynamic graph perspective. In Ivanova, V., Lambrix, P., Lohmann, S. & Pesquita, C. (eds). Proceedings of the International Workshop on Visualizations and User Interfaces for Ontologies and Linked Data (VOILA 2015), CEUR WS 1456, 69. CEUR-WS.org.

    Google Scholar

    Card S. K. 2002. Information visualization. In Human-Computer Interaction Handbook, Julie A. Jacko & Andrew Sears (eds). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 544–582.

    Google Scholar

    Casasanto D. 2008. Similarity and proximity: When does close in space mean close in mind? Memory & Cognition 36(6), 1047–1056.

    Google Scholar

    Catenazzi N., Sommaruga L. & Mazza R. 2009. User-friendly ontology editing and visualization tools: the OWLeasyViz approach. In 2009 13th International Conference Information Visualisation, 283–288. IEEE.

    Google Scholar

    Ceccaroni L. & Kendall E. 2003. A graphical environment for ontology development. In Proceedings of the Second International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 958–959. ACM.

    Google Scholar

    Chung M., Oh S., Kim K., Cho H. & Cho H.-K. 2005. Visualizing and authoring owl in ezOWL. In International Conference on Advanced Communication Technology, 528–531.

    Google Scholar

    da Silva I. C. S., Freitas C. M. D. S. & Santucci G. 2012. An integrated approach for evaluating the visualization of intensional and extensional levels of ontologies. In Proceedings of the 2012 BELIV Workshop: Beyond Time and Errors-Novel Evaluation Methods for Visualization, 2. ACM.

    Google Scholar

    Dmitrieva J. & Verbeek F. J. 2009. Node-link and containment methods in ontology visualization. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on OWL: Experiences and Directions-Volume 529, 240–247. CEUR-WS. org.

    Google Scholar

    Dudáš M., Zamazal O. & Svátek V. 2014. Roadmapping and navigating in the ontology visualization landscape. In Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management, 137–152. Springer.

    Google Scholar

    Eklund P., Roberts N. & Green S. 2002. OntoRama: browsing rdf ontologies using a hyperbolic-style browser. In Cyber Worlds, 2002. Proceedings. First International Symposium on, 405–411. IEEE.

    Google Scholar

    Falconer S. 2010. OntoGraf Protege plugin. Place, http://protegewiki.stanford.edu/wiki/OntoGraf (accessed 21 March 2014).

    Google Scholar

    Falconer S. M., Callendar C. & Storey M.-A. 2009. Flexviz: visualizing biomedical ontologies on the web. In International Conference on Biomedical Ontology, Software Demonstration.

    Google Scholar

    Fu B., Noy N. F. & Storey M.-A. 2013. Indented tree or graph? A usability study of ontology visualization techniques in the context of class mapping evaluation. In The Semantic Web-ISWC 2013, 117–134. Springer.

    Google Scholar

    Fu B., Noy N. F. & Storey M.-A. 2017. Eye tracking the user experience-an evaluation of ontology visualization techniques. Semantic Web 8(1), 23–41.

    Google Scholar

    García-Peñalvo F. J., Colomo-Palacios R., García J. & Therón R. 2012. Towards an ontology modeling tool. A validation in software engineering scenarios. Expert Systems with Applications 39(13), 11468–11478.

    Google Scholar

    Guo S. S. & Chan C. W. 2010. A tool for ontology visualizaiton in 3D graphics: Onto3DViz. In 2010 23rd Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering (CCECE), 1–4. IEEE.

    Google Scholar

    Haag F., Lohmann S., Negru S. & Ertl T. 2014. OntoViBe: an ontology visualization benchmark. In International Workshop on Visualizations and User Interfaces for Knowledge Engineering and Linked Data Analytics (VISUAL 2014), 1299, 14–27.

    Google Scholar

    Hartung M., Groß A. & Rahm E. 2012. CODEX: exploration of semantic changes between ontology versions. Bioinformatics 28(6), 895–896.

    Google Scholar

    Hayes P., Eskridge T. C., Saavedra R., Reichherzer T., Mehrotra M. & Bobrovnikoff D. 2005. Collaborative knowledge capture in ontologies. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Knowledge Capture, 99–106. ACM.

    Google Scholar

    Herman I., Melancon G. & Marshall M. S. 2000. Graph visualization and navigation in information visualization: a survey. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 6(1), 24–43.

    Google Scholar

    Holten D. 2006. Hierarchical edge bundles: visualization of adjacency relations in hierarchical data. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 12(5), 741–748.

    Google Scholar

    Hop W., de Ridder S., Frasincar F. & Hogenboom F. 2012. Using hierarchical edge bundles to visualize complex ontologies in glow. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, 304–311. ACM.

    Google Scholar

    Howse J., Stapleton G., Taylor K. & Chapman P. 2011. Visualizing ontologies: a case study. In The Semantic Web-ISWC 2011, 257–272. Springer.

    Google Scholar

    Hussain A., Latif K., Rextin A. T., Hayat A. & Alam M. 2014. Scalable visualization of semantic nets using power-law graphs. Applied Mathematics & Information Sciences 8(1), 355.

    Google Scholar

    Jiao Z. L., Liu Q., Li Y.-F., Marriott K., Wybrow M. 2013. Visualization of large ontologies with landmarks. In GRAPP/IVAPP, 461–470. SciTePress.

    Google Scholar

    Johnson B. & Shneiderman B. 1991. Tree-maps: a space-filling approach to the visualization of hierarchical information structures. In Proceedings of the 2nd Conference on Visualization'91, 284–291. IEEE Computer Society Press.

    Google Scholar

    Katifori A., Halatsis C., Lepouras G., Vassilakis C. & Giannopoulou E. 2007. Ontology visualization methods a survey. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 39(4), 10.

    Google Scholar

    Katifori A., Torou E., Halatsis C., Lepouras G. & Vassilakis C. 2006. A comparative study of four ontology visualization techniques in protege: experiment setup and preliminary results. In Tenth International Conference on Information Visualization, 2006. IV 2006, 417–423. IEEE.

    Google Scholar

    Knublauch H., Fergerson R. W., Noy N. F. & Musen M. A. 2004. The Protege OWL plugin: an open development environment for semantic web applications. In The Semantic Web-ISWC 2004, 229–243. Springer.

    Google Scholar

    Kriglstein S. & Wallner G. 2010. Knoocks – a visualization approach for OWL Lite ontologies. In 2010 International Conference on Complex, Intelligent and Software Intensive Systems (CISIS), 950–955. IEEE.

    Google Scholar

    Krivov S., Williams R. & Villa F. 2007. GrOWL: A tool for visualization and editing of OWL ontologies. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 5(2), 54–57.

    Google Scholar

    Lambrix P., Dragisic Z., Ivanova V. & Anslow C. 2016. Visualization for ontology evolution. In Ivanova, V., Lambrix, P., Lohmann, S. & Pesquita, C. (eds). Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Visualization and Interaction for Ontologies and Linked Data (VOILA 2016), CEUR WS 1704 , 54–67. CEUR-WS.org.

    Google Scholar

    Lamping J., Rao R. & Pirolli P. 1995. A focus+context technique based on hyperbolic geometry for visualizing large hierarchies. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 401–408. ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar

    Lanzenberger M., Sampson J. & Rester M. 2009. Visualization in ontology tools. In Barolli, L., Xhafa, F. & Hsu, H. (eds). 2009 International Conference on Complex, Intelligent and Software Intensive Systems (CISIS), 705–711. IEEE CS.

    Google Scholar

    Liebig T. & Noppens O. 2005. OntoTrack: a semantic approach for ontology authoring. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 3(2), 116–131.

    Google Scholar

    Lohmann S., Link V., Marbach E. & Negru S. 2015. WebVOWL: web-based visualization of ontologies. In Proceedings of EKAW 2014 Satellite Events, LNAI 8982, 154–158. Springer.

    Google Scholar

    Lohmann S., Negru S., Haag F. & Ertl T. 2016. Visualizing ontologies with VOWL. Semantic Web 7(4), 399–419.

    Google Scholar

    Motta E., Mulholland P., Peroni S., dAquin M., Gomez-Perez J. M., Mendez V. & Zablith F. 2011. A novel approach to visualizing and navigating ontologies. In The Semantic Web-ISWC 2011, 470–486. Springer.

    Google Scholar

    Mouromtsev D., Pavlov D., Emelyanov Y., Morozov A., Razdyakonov D. & Galkin M. 2015. The simple, web-based tool for visualization and sharing of semantic data and ontologies. In ISWC 2015 Posters & Demonstrations Track. CEUR.

    Google Scholar

    Novak J. D. & Gowin D. B. 1984. Learning how to learn. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar

    Ochs C., Geller J., Musen M. A. & Perl Y. 2017. Real time summarization and visualization of ontology change in protege. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Visualization and Interaction for Ontologies and Linked Data (ISWC 2017), CEUR Workshop Proceedings 1947, 75–86. CEUR-WS.org.

    Google Scholar

    Roberts J. C. 2007. State of the art: coordinated & multiple views in exploratory visualization. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Coordinated and Multiple Views in Exploratory Visualization, CMV’07, 61–71, Washington, DC. IEEE Computer Society.

    Google Scholar

    Sarkar M. & Brown M. H. 1992. Graphical fisheye views of graphs. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 83–91. ACM.

    Google Scholar

    Schaaf M., Jahn F., Tahar K., Kücherer C., Winter A. & Paech B. 2016. Visualization of large ontologies in university education from a tool point of view. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics 228, 349.

    Google Scholar

    Shneiderman B. 1996. The eyes have it: a task by data type taxonomy for information visualizations. In IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages, 1996 Proceedings, 336–343. IEEE, ACM.

    Google Scholar

    Somasundaram R. 2007. OntoSELF: a 3D Ontology Visualization Tool. PhD thesis, Miami University.

    Google Scholar

    Storey M.-A., Musen M., Silva J., Best C., Ernst N., Fergerson R. & Noy N. 2001. Jambalaya: interactive visualization to enhance ontology authoring and knowledge acquisition in Protege. In Workshop on Interactive Tools for Knowledge Capture (K-CAP-2001), 93.

    Google Scholar

    Tufte E. R. 1986. The Visual Display of Quantitative Information. Graphics Press.

    Google Scholar

    Von Landesberger T., Kuijper A., Schreck T., Kohlhammer J., van Wijk J. J., Fekete J.-D. & Fellner D. W. 2011. Visual analysis of large graphs: state-of-the-art and future research challenges. In Computer Graphics Forum, 30, 1719–1749. Wiley Online Library.

    Google Scholar

    Wang T. D. & Parsia B. 2006. Cropcircles: topology sensitive visualization of owl class hierarchies. In International Semantic Web Conference, 4273, 695–708. Springer.

    Google Scholar

    Ware C. 2012. Information Visualization: Perception for Design. Elsevier.

    Google Scholar

    Weiten M. 2009. Ontostudio® as a ontology engineering environment. In Semantic Knowledge Management, 51–60. Springer.

    Google Scholar

    Wielemaker J., Schreiber G. & Wielinga B. 2005. Using triples for implementation: the Triple20 ontology-manipulation tool. In The Semantic Web-ISWC 2005, 773–785. Springer.

    Google Scholar

    Wiens V., Lohmann S. & Auer S. 2017. Semantic zooming for ontology graph visualizations. In Proceedings of the Knowledge Capture Conference (K-CAP’17), 4:1–4:8. ACM.

    Google Scholar

  • Cite this article

    Marek Dudáš, Steffen Lohmann, Vojtěch Svátek, Dmitry Pavlov. 2018. Ontology visualization methods and tools: a survey of the state of the art. The Knowledge Engineering Review 33(1), doi: 10.1017/S0269888918000073
    Marek Dudáš, Steffen Lohmann, Vojtěch Svátek, Dmitry Pavlov. 2018. Ontology visualization methods and tools: a survey of the state of the art. The Knowledge Engineering Review 33(1), doi: 10.1017/S0269888918000073
    shu
Download PDF

Article Metrics

Article views(37) PDF downloads(115)

Other Articles By Authors

RESEARCH ARTICLE   Open Access    

Ontology visualization methods and tools: a survey of the state of the art

  • 1.

    University of Economics, Prague, W. Churchill Sq. 1938/4, 130 67 Prague 3 - Žižkov, Czech Republic; e-mail: marek.dudas@vse.cz svatek@vse.cz

  • 2.

    Fraunhofer Institute for Intelligent Analysis and Information Systems (IAIS), Schloss Birlinghoven, 53757

  • 3.

    IITMO University, 49 Kronverksky Pr., St. Petersburg, 197101, Russia e-mail: dmitry.pavlov@vismart.biz

  • Published online: 20 July 2018
The Knowledge Engineering Review  33,  2018, 33(1)  |  Cite this article

Abstract: Abstract: Various ontology visualization tools using different visualization methods exist and new ones are being developed every year. The goal of this paper is to follow up on previous surveys with an updated classification of ontology visualization methods and a comprehensive survey of available tools. The tools are analyzed for the used visualization methods, interaction techniques and supported ontology constructs. It shows that most of the tools apply two-dimensional node-link visualizations with a focus on class hierarchies. Color and shape are used with little variation, support for constructs introduced with version 2 of the OWL Web Ontology Language is limited, and it often remains vague what tasks and use cases are supported by the visualizations. Major challenges are the limited maturity and usability of many of the tools as well as providing an overview of large ontologies while also showing details on demand. We see a high demand for a universal ontology visualization framework implementing a core set of visual and interactive features that can be extended and customized to respective use cases.

    HTML

    Acknowledgments

    • This research was supported by UEP IGA F4/90/2015, UEP IGA F4/28/2016 and by long-term institutional support of research activities by the Faculty of Informatics and Statistics, University of Economics, Prague.

    • https://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-primer/

    • https://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-schema/

    • https://www.w3.org/TR/turtle/

    • https://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-manchester-syntax/

    • http://www.omg.org/spec/UML/

    • The recommendation system is available at http://owl.vse.cz:8080/OVTR/.

    • Similarly, as there is no single definition of what a large graph is (Von Landesberger et al., 2011), it is hard to give a clear definition of when to consider an ontology a large one. For the sake of our research, we call large ontologies those containing more than 100 classes.

    • The survey also covers non-OWL visualization tools.

    • http://linkedscience.org/events/visual2014/

    • http://voila2015.visualdataweb.org

    • http://voila2016.visualdataweb.org

    • http://voila2017.visualdataweb.org

    • http://www.ontologyportal.org

    • http://neon-toolkit.org

    • http://ols.wordvis.com

    • http://www.semafora-systems.com/en/products/ontostudio/

    • http://www.co-ode.org/downloads/owlviz/

    • http://protegewiki.stanford.edu/wiki/SOVA

    • http://www.topquadrant.com/tools/IDE-topbraid-composer-maestro-edition/

    • http://bioportal.bioontology.org

    • http://growl.novasemantics.it

    • http://protegewiki.stanford.edu/wiki/OntoViz

    • https://protegewiki.stanford.edu/wiki/OWLPropViz

    • https://thematix.com/tools/vom/

    Rights and permissions
    • © Cambridge University Press, 2018 2018Cambridge University Press
References (60)
  • About this article
    Cite this article
    Marek Dudáš, Steffen Lohmann, Vojtěch Svátek, Dmitry Pavlov. 2018. Ontology visualization methods and tools: a survey of the state of the art. The Knowledge Engineering Review 33(1), doi: 10.1017/S0269888918000073
    Marek Dudáš, Steffen Lohmann, Vojtěch Svátek, Dmitry Pavlov. 2018. Ontology visualization methods and tools: a survey of the state of the art. The Knowledge Engineering Review 33(1), doi: 10.1017/S0269888918000073
    shu

    • Catalog

      Return