I still never cease to be amazed at how wonderful and powerful tools are so often and easily overlooked. The most recent example is Cytoscape, a winner in our recent review of more than 25 tools for large-scale RDF graph visualization.
We began this review because the UMBEL subject concept “backbone” ontology will involve literally thousands of concepts. Graph visualization software suitable to very large graphs would aid UMBEL’s construction and refinement.
Cytoscape describes itself as a bioinformatics software platform for visualizing molecular interaction networks and integrating these interactions with gene expression profiles and other state data. Cytoscape is partially based on GINY and Piccolo, among other open-source toolkits. What is more important to our immediate purposes, however, is that its design also lends itself well to general network and graph manipulation.
Cytoscape was first brought to our attention by François Belleau of Bio2RDF.org. Thanks François, and also for the strong recommendation and tips. Special thanks are also due to Frédérick Giasson of Zitgist for his early testing and case examples. Thanks, Fred!
We had a number of requirements and items on our wish list prior to beginning our review. We certainly did not expect most or all of these items to be met:

Cytoscape met or exceeded our wish list in all areas save one: it does not support direct ingest of RDF (other than some pre-set BioPAX formats). However, that proved to be no obstacle because of the clean input format support of the tool. Simple parsing of triples into a CSV file is sufficient for input. Moreover, as described below, there are other cool attribute management functions that this clean file format supports as well.
The following screen shot shows the major Cytoscape screen. We will briefly walk through some of its key views (click for full size):
This Java tool has a fairly standard Eclipse-like interface and design. The main display window (A) shows the active portion of the current graph view. (Note that in this instance we are looking at a ‘Spring’ layout for the same Music sub-graph presented above.) Selections can easily be made in this main display (the red box) or by directly clicking on a node. The display itself represents a zoom (B) of the main UMBEL graph, which can also be easily panned (the blue box on B) or itself scaled (C). Those items that are selected in the main display window also appear as editable nodes or edges and attributes in the data editing view (D).
The appearance of the graph is fully editable via the VizMapper (E). An interesting aspect here is that every relation type in the graph (its RDF properties, or predicates) can be visually displayed in a different manner. The graphs or sub-graphs themselves can be selected, but also most importantly, the display can respond to a very robust and flexible filtering framework (F). Filters can be easily imported and can apply to nodes, edges (relations), the full graph or other aspects (depending on plugin). A really neat feature is the ability to search the graph in various flexible ways (G), which alters the display view. Any field or attribute can be indexed for faster performance.
In addition to these points, Cytoscape supports the following features:
The Cytoscape project also offers:
Unfortunately, other than these official resources, there appears to be a dearth of general community discussion and tips on the Web. Here’s hoping that situation soon changes!
There is a broad suite of plugins available for Cytoscape, and directions to developers for developing new ones.
The master page also includes third-party plugins. The candidates useful to UMBEL and its graphing needs — also applicable to standard semantic Web applications — appear to be:
Importantly, please note there is a wealth of biology- and molecular-specific plugins also available that are not included in the generic listing above.
Our initial use of the tool suggests some use tips:
Cytoscape was first released in 2002 and has undergone steady development since. Most recently, the 2.x and especially 2.3 versions forward have seen a flurry of general developments that have greatly broadened the tool’s appeal and capabilities. It was perhaps only these more recent developments that have positioned Cytoscape for broader use.
I suspect another reason that this tool has been overlooked by the general semWeb community is the fact that its sponsors have positioned it mostly in the biological space. Their short descriptor for the project, for example, is: Cytoscape is an open source bioinformatics software platform for visualizing molecular interaction networks and integrating these interactions with gene expression profiles and other state data. That statement hardly makes it sound like a general tool!
Another reason for the lack of attention, of course, is the common tendency for different disciplines not to share enough information. Indeed, one reason for my starting the Sweet Tools listing was hopefully as a means of overcoming artificial boundaries and assembling relevant semantic Web tools in one central place.
Yet despite the product’s name and its positioning by sponsors, Cytoscape is indeed a general graph visualization tool, and arguably the most powerful one reviewed from our earlier list. Cytoscape can easily accommodate any generalized graph structure, is scalable, provides all conceivable visualization and modeling options, and has a clean extension and plugin framework for adding specialized functionality.
With just minor tweaks or new plugins, Cytoscape could directly read RDF and its various serializations, could support processing any arbitrary OWL or RDF-S ontology, and could support other specific semWeb-related tasks. As well, a tool like CPath (http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1660554), which enables querying of biological databases and then storing them in Cytoscape format, offers some tantalizing prospects for a general model for other Web query options.
For these reasons, I gladly announce Cytoscape as the next deserving winner of the (highly coveted, but cheesy!
) AI3 Jewels & Doubloons award.
Cytoscape’s sponsors — the U.S. National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) and Unilever PLC — and its developers — the Institute for Systems Biology, the University of California – San Diego, the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, L’Institut Pasteur and Agilent Technologies – are to be heartily thanked for this excellent tool!
![]() |
An AI3 Jewels & Doubloons Winner |

The pending UMBEL subject concept “backbone” ontology will involve literally thousands of concepts. In order to manage and view such a large structure, a concerted effort to find suitable graph visualization software was mounted. This post presents the candidate listing, as well as some useful starting resources and background information.
A subsequent post will present the surprise winner of our evaluation.
For grins, you may also like to see various example visualizations, most with a large-graph bent:
Here is the listing of 26 candidate graph visualization programs assembled to date:
IVC Software Framework – the InfoVis Cyberinfrastructure (IVC) software framework is a set of libraries that provide a simple and uniform programming-interface to algorithms and user-interface to end-users by leveraging the power of the Eclipse Rich Client Platform (RCP)
I wrote the following in response to a recent press inquiry asking me to define the terms “semantic Web” and “industry standards”. It got me to thinking about how some new companies are misappropriating the terms:
The “Semantic Web” is a vision first promoted by Tim Berners-Lee, founder of the WWW and director of the W3C standards consortium [1,2,3]. In its full sense, understood to require many years to reach fruition, today’s document Web evolves into a Web of data with machines being able to understand the meaning of that data and to interoperate and take action on it, performing many useful tasks for people such as finding relevant and desired information and doing and interconnecting stuff automatically. This longer-term vision is often expressed as the “uppercase” Semantic Web.
Nearer term, the evolution to a Web of data still occurs but the aspirations are more immediate and at hand. Important Web data is broken out and expressed in ways that aid interconnections and interoperability. Key sources, like Wikipedia and Census data and much else is now expressed at the more atomic data and object (as opposed to Web page) level, that leads to meaningful linkages and interoperability.
This partial vision, also supported by Berners-Lee (and, of course, many others), is being demonstrated by the linked data initiative [4], bringing meaningful results to both machines and humans, and is often called the “lowercase” semantic Web. Others have also called this phase in the Web’s evolution “Web 3.0″ (a phrase I dislike however because it conveys little meaning nor compliance to any standards).
Many wonderful and dedicated people have been working towards these visions for a decade or more. Some adhere more to the “pure” uppercase expression of the vision; others are more near-term and pragmatic lowercase in nature. The press sometimes likes to see these differences in viewpoint as expressions of controversy or dispute in the community, but, to my own lights, I think they are more differences in perspective than objectives.
The common thread is the “semantics”, or the meaning, of the data. If we know that two pieces of information or data are related in meaning than we can act accordingly upon them.
In any case, the mechanisms by which semantic interoperability occur are via standards, nearly all developed and promulgated by the W3C. Key semantic Web standards include URIs (of course), Resource Description Framework (RDF) [5] that defines the “triples” of how to express data relationships between subjects and objects (the two pieces of data), RDF Schema or the Web ontology language (OWL) [6] for how to describe data domains and their structure and vocabularies, GRDDL [7] for converting common information to RDF, SPARQL [8] for how to query compliant semantic data stores, and of course many others.
By “industry compliant”, we mean that it conforms to all of these open standards guiding this evolution to the Semantic Web. And, obviously, via this compliance, we are then able to easily interoperate with others that also so conform.
While there are certainly cases and issues where I disagree with the definitions or specific uses of semantic Web concepts by the World Wide Web consortium (W3C), without these standards there would be chaos and no interoperability moving forward.
So, while I think it is fair game to criticize and lobby for changes in the W3C’s promulgations, it is not “compliant” to not use the standards. Beware of emerging companies that claim the mantle of the semantic Web — or worse, still, push the fluff of Web 3.0 — but do not adhere to these standards. For in the end, they are not the semantic Web, but just another example of the proprietary dinosaurs of the past.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic_web
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Berners-Lee
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wide_Web_Consortium
[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linked_Data
[5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_Description_Framework
[6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_Ontology_Language
[7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GRDDL
[8] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SPARQL