[Explorer 100] What is the difference between Knowledge Graphs and Semantic Web?

What is the difference between Knowledge Graphs and Semantic Web?

Tip: Debate the future of the Semantic Web, discussing the merits and drawbacks of focusing on ontologies versus knowledge graphs as the primary framework for data integration and sharing.

Note: Topics preceded by [KGCP] are assignments for participants enrolled in the Knowledge Graph Certificate Program. KGCP participants are encouraged to comment on each other’s posts as part of their learning experience.

Other platform members are kindly asked to allow KGCP participants to respond first, and then join the conversation by adding your insights or mentoring their responses. Your support and guidance will be greatly appreciated!

1 Like

KG and SW technology are both a form of computational linguistics.

The linage of the semantic web is to create interconnected communication. Semantic webs originated as DARPA, and the WWW from CERN. PCs becoming normal made the semantic web even more useful. There is a video on the Marc and Ben Show that goes over the creation of the web.

Semantic webs use semantic analytical systems which are a computational language modeling of the ‘meaning of words’ in a text or texts [YoutTube.com/@OER-VLC](search.app/?link=https://youtube.com/watch?v=bzz1pFWAtMo&search=What is linguistics&app=GEN102 - What is Linguistics (not)? YouTube · The Virtual Linguistics Campus).
A great example of the semantic web can be is n this document an algorithm is applied to pattern specific semantics. So a semantic web computes information as data. In another instance this data could be a node and edge structure and become a knowledge graph.

Where as we use KGs to understand data. In another example, application #60/035,205, edges and nodes are given weights based on how many times they are clicked.
In this case the node is the top level domain and the edges are all the links inside the page. The syntax of a link inside the page may lead to a different page with an entirely new ontology and thus skip the broader semantic web entirely and instead focus on what is known between the related node pages. Therefore, KGs can be used to manually structure data for local contexts and names, where as SWs, can be used to contextualize information.

2 Likes

For builders and explorers who are already familiar with Semantic Web standards, leveraging them in Knowledge Graph projects can simplify development and expand capabilities, but this isn’t mandatory (or even viable) for all applications.

The Semantic Web (SW) emerged as a vision for a smarter, interconnected World Wide Web. Its primary goals are to integrate and share knowledge by embedding meaning within information to enable automated discovery and exchange. Semantic Web standards like RDF, OWL, and SPARQL provide a framework for linked data, allowing machines to understand and process information across domains.

Knowledge Graphs (KGs) evolved as a practical approach to structuring data that supports knowledge-based queries and inferencing. KGs integrate diverse information sources, often within a specific domain and frequently for enterprise use, with goals that overlap with SW use cases such as data discovery and integration.

However, KG and SW initiatives are not always aligned in their approach. Not all resources on the SW are KGs, and not all KGs use SW standards, meaning many KGs are not natively compatible with the SW’s linked data framework.

Building a KG does not require SW standards, so KG developers can make practical choices on whether or not to adopt them. Those using SW standards benefit from established interoperability and robust capabilities. Standards like RDF, OWL, and SPARQL are widely adopted, whereas alternatives remain less common.

While the goals of KGs and the SW often align, their technical approaches may differ, particularly in the use of SW ontologies and graph languages. SW-based KGs typically rely on ontologies (formal knowledge structures) to define entities and relationships. However, many KGs prioritize application-specific needs over universal interoperability, favoring flexible, task-oriented schemas rather than comprehensive ontologies.

Looking to the future, a hybrid approach may offer the best of both worlds. KGs could efficiently manage data within specific contexts, while SW-based ontologies could ensure interoperability across broader domains. This convergence would combine the adaptability of KGs with the SW’s structured data vision, fostering a more integrated framework for knowledge and reasoning across the Web.

3 Likes

Semantic Web provides a framework for data to have their own meaning. Knowledge graphs are structured representation of real-world data (RWD), that bridge ML/AI and Semantic Web, thus drive innovation. 1 2

Thanks Runquan for the link to IBM. Vendors of that caliber bring much-needed credibility to the users of KG technology.

I particularly like your phrase: “framework for data to have their own meaning”. IMO meaning is embedded in content, and understanding is a process unique to sentient beings. For understanding anything - IRL or digital - we need to gather and make a “world” that contains information that is sufficiently organized to convey meaning from one being to another.

Hi Keith, I am trying to get caught up and/or maybe a little ahead of the coursework.

This was a nice intro about the difference between knowledge graphs and semantic web. When I first started working on my linked data application, I rarely heard the term “knowledge graph” and the phrase, “semantic web” was so utopian and exciting when I first heard of it.

I particularly have liked Ora Lassila’s talk Lassila - 2024 - ISWC Keynote

where he discusses the idea that it doesn’t have to be ‘the semantic web’ , but that there can be many. I think this is where I see Knowledge Graphs as making up smaller webs that are semantic and interconnected.

I visualize this as many different types of woven cloths in different kinds of threads and with different textures and materials from many different domains, but all able to interoperate with each other.

The idea of RDF being a framework to interconnect these cloths is still exciting to me.

1 Like