A comparative study of property-to-label and property-to-node refactoring in ontology-based graph data modeling

Ade Hodijah; Sri Ratna Wulan; Jonner Hutahaean; Rahil Jumiyani

doi:10.33795/eltek.v24i2.10896

Authors

Ade Hodijah Politeknik Negeri Bandung
Sri Ratna Wulan Politeknik Negeri Bandung
Jonner Hutahaean Politeknik Negeri Bandung
Rahil Jumiyani Politeknik Negeri Bandung

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33795/eltek.v24i2.10896

Keywords:

Protégé, Neo4j, Neosemantics, Owlready2

Abstract

Integrating Web Ontology Language with Neo4j through the neosemantics (n10s) framework enables semantic validation and automated reasoning that are not natively supported by Labeled Property Graphs. However, the choice of graph refactoring pattern influences query performance. This study compares two ontology-based graph refactoring approaches, namely Property-to-Label (P2L) and Property-to-Node (P2N), implemented in Protégé and integrated into Neo4j using n10s and Owlready2. Both models were evaluated for semantic validation and ontology reasoning using the PET ontology, while their query execution performance was benchmarked using 78 Cypher query variants derived from the IMDB dataset. The evaluation examined the relationship between execution time and reductions in WHERE clauses following schema refactoring. The results show that both approaches successfully enforce ontology constraints and infer missing classifications from incomplete data. Performance analysis indicates that both P2L and P2N improved query execution time, with the highest reduction percentage was 89% for queries with four total number of the WHERE. P2L exhibited a more consistent relationship between WHERE clause reduction and execution time improvement due to Neo4j's native label indexing.

References

J. Barrasa and J. Webber, “Building Knowledge Graphs,” O’REILLY, [Online]. Available: https://neo4j.com/knowledge-graphs-practitioners-guide/

D. Bloor, N. Ugwuoke, D. Taylor, K. Lewis, L. Mur, and C. Lu, “Towards a Personal Health Knowledge Graph Framework for Patient Monitoring,” Nov. 11, 2023, arXiv: arXiv:2311.06524. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2311.06524.

C. Sharma, P. Genevès, N. Gesbert, and N. Layaïda, “Schema-Based Query Optimisation for Graph Databases,” Proc. ACM Manag. Data, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1–29, Feb. 2025, doi: 10.1145/3709722.

G. Micale et al., “MultiGraphMatch: A Subgraph Matching Algorithm for Multigraphs,” ACM Trans. Knowl. Discov. Data, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 1–36, Jun. 2025, doi: 10.1145/3728361.

R. Angles and R. García, “Transforming RDF Data into Property Graphs,” IEEE Latin Am. Trans., vol. 18, no. 01, pp. 130–137, Jan. 2020, doi: 10.1109/TLA.2020.9049470.

G. Abuoda, D. Dell’Aglio, A. Keen, and K. Hose, “Transforming RDF-star to Property Graphs: A Preliminary Analysis of Transformation Approaches”.

D. Tomaszuk, R. Angles, and H. Thakkar, “PGO: Describing Property Graphs in RDF,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 118355–118369, 2020, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3002018.

S. Purohit, N. Van, and G. Chin, “Semantic Property Graph for Scalable Knowledge Graph Analytics,” in 2021 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data), Orlando, FL, USA: IEEE, Dec. 2021, pp. 2672–2677. doi: 10.1109/BigData52589.2021.9671547.

F. Darari, Knowledge Graph Mini Handbook, vol. v1.1.0. Faculty of Computer Science Universitas Indonesia.

D. Bloor, “A Personal Health Knowledge Graph Framework for Management of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease,” ABERYSTWYTH UNIVERSITY. [Online]. Available: https://pure.aber.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/105519514/Bloor_Daniel.pdf

T. L. Andrews, “Graph schema validation at last? Work towards a StemmaREST ontology with Neo4J, RDF-STAR, and SHACL,” Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, vol. 41, no. Supplement_1, pp. i3–i12, Apr. 2026, doi: 10.1093/llc/fqaf067.

A. Hodijah and T. Gelar, “Analysis Graph-Based Data Model For Simple Search Application Using NER Data,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Applied Science and Technology on Engineering Science 2023 (iCAST-ES 2023), vol. 230, M. U. H. Al Rasyid and M. R. Mufid, Eds., in Advances in Engineering Research, vol. 230. , Dordrecht: Atlantis Press International BV, 2024, pp. 943–957. doi: 10.2991/978-94-6463-364-1_86.

A. M. Fonseca and L. Camolesi, “Refactoring Rules for Graph Databases,” in New Contributions in Information Systems and Technologies, vol. 353, A. Rocha, A. M. Correia, S. Costanzo, and L. P. Reis, Eds., in Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol. 353. , Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2015, pp. 33–42. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-16486-1_4.

N. F. Noy and D. L. McGuinness, “Ontology Development 101: A Guide to Creating Your First Ontology”.

S. Aminah, A. Alfa Krisnadhi, and A. Nizar Hidayanto, “Ontological Framework for the Analysis of Outcome-Based Curriculum in Higher Education,” IEEE Access, vol. 13, pp. 31497–31516, 2025, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2025.3542881.

Neo4j Labs, Neosemantics (n10s). [Online]. Available: https://github.com/neo4j-labs/neosemantics

J.-B. Lamy, Owlready2. [Online]. Available: https://github.com/pwin/owlready2

J.Barrasa, “Importing RDF data into Neo4j,” Jesús Barrasa. Accessed: Aug. 03, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://jbarrasa.com/2016/06/07/importing-rdf-data-into-neo4j/

A. Hodijah and U. T. Setijohatmo, “Analysis of frequent itemset generation based on trie data structure in Apriori algorithm,” TELKOMNIKA, vol. 19, no. 5, p. 1553, Oct. 2021, doi: 10.12928/telkomnika.v19i5.19273.

A. Hodijah, U. T. Setijohatmo, G. Munawar, and G. S. Ramadhanty, “Multi-threaded approach in generating frequent itemset of Apriori algorithm based on trie data structure,” TELKOMNIKA, vol. 20, no. 5, p. 1034, Oct. 2022, doi: 10.12928/telkomnika.v20i5.24088.

J.Barrasa, “Importing RDF data into Neo4j,” Jesús Barrasa. Accessed: Aug. 20, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://jbarrasa.com/2016/06/07/importing-rdf-data-into-neo4j/