nach oben

Journal on Data Semantics

Erschienen in:

01.06.2013 | Original Article

Grounding Ontologies with Social Processes and Natural Language

verfasst von: Christophe Debruyne, Trung-Kien Tran, Robert Meersman

Erschienen in: Journal on Data Semantics | Ausgabe 2-3/2013

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Ontologies for enabling semantic interoperability is one of the branches in which agreement between a heterogeneous group of stakeholders is of vital importance. As agreements are the result of interactions, appropriate methods should take into account the natural language used by the community during those interactions. In this article, we first extend a fact-oriented formalism for the construction of so-called hybrid ontologies. In hybrid ontologies, concepts are described both formally and informally and the agreements are being grounded in community interactions. We furthermore present GOSPL, a collaborative ontology engineering method on top of this extension and describe how agreements on formal and informal descriptions are complementary and interplay. We show how the informal descriptions can drive the ontology construction process and how commitments from the ontology to the application are exploited to steer the agreement processes. All of the ideas presented in this article have been implemented in a tool and used in an experiment involving 40+ users, of which a discussion is presented.

Vorheriger Artikel Improving Business Process Model Quality Using Domain Ontologies

Nächster Artikel Ontology Change Management and Identification of Change Patterns

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

There are only fact types, no distinction between relations and attributes. The constraints on roles in these fact types determine the “attributeness” of a fact type.

We do, however, capture what part of the conceptualization and its axiomatization should be present in all commitments to ensure proper semantic interoperation between the different systems (we refer to Sect. 3.1 for more details).

Developing Ontology Guided Methods and Applications.

http://www.w3.org/TR/owl2-overview/

Semantic tableaux are an efficient and convenient means to test whether a formula \(\phi \) is a logical consequence of a set of formulas \(\Sigma \) in FOL. This is done by trying to make \(\phi \) false with respect to \(\Sigma \) by looking for counterexamples for the sequent \(\Sigma \circ \phi \). A sequent are two sets of formulas \(\phi _1,\ldots ,\phi _n\) and \(\psi _1,\ldots ,\psi _m\) separated by the symbols \(\circ \). A evaluation \(V\) is called a counterexample of a sequent \(\phi _1,\ldots ,\phi _n \circ \psi _1,\ldots ,\psi _m\) if \(V(\phi _1) = \cdots = V(\phi _n) = 1\) and \(V(\psi _1) =\cdots = V(\psi _m) = 1\). When a formula \(\phi \) occurs on both sides of the sequent, the evaluation of \(\phi \) returns both 1 and 0. In that case, the sequent contains a contradiction and thus has no counterexample.

Formulas on the LHS of a sequent have to be made true and formulas on the RHS of a sequent false. For instance, in \(\Sigma ,\alpha \wedge \beta \circ \Pi ,\alpha \wedge \beta \) is true if and only if both \(\alpha \) and \(\beta \) are true, which then yields the subproblem \(\Sigma ,\alpha ,\beta \circ \Pi \) (using the \(\wedge L\) rule, where the ‘L’ stands for left). A branch is considered closed if it contains the same formula both on the LHS and RHS in one of the sequents of a branch. Otherwise the branch is open and a counterexample is found. A counterexample is a model that makes the LHS of the top sequent true, but the RHS false.

Franconi and Mosca published a technical paper containing more information entitled “The formalisation of ORM2 and its encoding in OWL2”. Available from https://www.inf.unibz.it/krdb/pub/TR/KRDB12-2.pdf

The first version of her paper was published in 2007 in the Computer Research Repository. Later on, she provided a second version of her paper with corrections, more extensive related work, etc. in 2009. Both versions of the paper can be found here: http://arxiv.org/abs/cs.LO/0702089

Which is only true for only certain types of applications.

http://www.hermit-reasoner.com

Or a part of the community that felt the need to participate in a particular discussion.

Al-Debei MM, Fitzgerald G (2009) OntoEng: a design method for ontology engineering in information systems. In: Proceedings of the ACM OOPSLA’09. ODiSE 2009, pp 1–25

Alexander PR, Nyulas C, Tudorache T, Whetzel PL, Noy NF, Musen MA (2011) Semantic infrastructure to enable collaboration in ontology development. In: Smari WW, Fox G (eds) CTS. IEEE, pp 423–430

Arpírez Vega JC, Corcho O, Fernández-López M, Gómez-Pérez A (2003) Webode in a nutshell. AI Mag 24(3):37–48

Baader F, Horrocks I, Sattler U (2008) Description logics. Found Artif Intell 3:135–179CrossRef

Borgida A (1996) On the relative expressiveness of description logics and predicate logics. Artif Intell 82(1–2):353–367MathSciNetCrossRef

Bussler C, Tannen V, Fundulaki I (eds) (2005) Semantic web and databases, second international workshop, SWDB 2004, Toronto, Canada, August 29–30, 2004, Revised Selected Papers, vol. 3372

Calvanese D, De Giacomo G, Lembo D, Lenzerini M, Rosati R (2008) Path-based identification constraints in description logics. In: Brewka G, Lang J (eds) KR. AAAI Press, Menlo Park, pp 231–241

Calvanese D, De Giacomo G, Lenzerini M (1998) On the decidability of query containment under constraints. In: Mendelzon AO, Paredaens J (eds) PODS. ACM Press, New York, pp 149–158

del Carmen Suárez-Figueroa M, Gómez-Pérez A (2008) Towards a glossary of activities in the ontology engineering field. LREC. European Language Resources Association

10.

Ciuciu I, Debruyne C (2012) Assessing the user satisfaction with an ontology engineering tool based on social processes. In: Herrero P, Meersman R, Dillon TS (eds) On the move to meaningful internet systems: OTM 2012 workshops. LNCS, vol 7567. Springer, Berlin, pp 242–251

11.

De Leenheer P, Christiaens S, Meersman R (2010) Business semantics management: a case study for competency-centric HRM. Comput Ind 61(8):760–775CrossRef

12.

De Leenheer P, Debruyne C (2008) DOGMA-MESS: a tool for fact-oriented collaborative ontology evolution. In: On the move to meaningful internet systems, 2008: ORM (ORM 2008). LNCS, Springer, Monterrey, Mexico

13.

De Leenheer P, Meersman R (2007) Towards community-based evolution of knowledge-intensive systems. In: Meersman R, Tari Z (eds) OTM conferences (1). LNCS, vol 4803. Springer, Berlin, pp 989–1006

14.

De Leenheer P, de Moor A, Meersman R (2007) Context dependency management in ontology engineering: a formal approach. Journal on Data Semantics, vol 8. LNCS 4380, Springer, Berlin, pp 26–56

15.

De Nicola A, Missikoff M, Navigli R (2005) A proposal for a unified process for ontology building: upon. In: Andersen KV, Debenham JK, Wagner R (eds) DEXA. LNCS, vol 3588. Springer, Berlin, pp 655–664

16.

De Nicola A, Missikoff M, Navigli R (2009) A software engineering approach to ontology building. Inf Syst 34:258–275CrossRef

17.

Debruyne C, De Leenheer P, Meersman R (2011) Empowering enterprise data governance with bsg. In: Musen MA, Corcho O (eds) K-CAP. ACM, New York, pp 197–198

18.

Debruyne C, Meersman R (2011) Semantic interoperation of information systems by evolving ontologies through formalized social processes. In: Eder J, Bieliková M, Tjoa AM (eds) ADBIS. LNCS, vol 6909. Springer, Berlin, pp 444–459

19.

Debruyne C, Meersman R (2012) GOSPL: a method and tool for fact-oriented hybrid ontology engineering. In: Morzy T, Härder T, Wrembel R (eds) ADBIS. LNCS, vol 7503. Springer, Berlin, pp 153–166

20.

Debruyne C, Vasquez C (2013) Exploiting natural language definitions and (legacy) data for facilitating agreement processes. In: Winkler D, Biffl S, Bergsmann J (eds) SWQD. LNBIP, vol 133. Springer, Berlin, pp 244–258

21.

Dellschaft K, Engelbrecht H, Monte Barreto J, Rutenbeck S, Staab S (2008) Cicero: tracking design rationale in collaborative ontology engineering. In: Bechhofer S, Hauswirth M, Hoffmann J, Koubarakis M (eds) ESWC. LNCS, vol 5021. Springer, Berlin, pp 782–786

22.

Fernández-López M, Gomez-Perez A, Juristo N (1997) METHONTOLOGY: from ontological art towards ontological engineering. In: Proceedings of the AAAI97 spring, symposium, pp 33–40

23.

Franconi E, Mosca A, Solomakhin D (2012) Orm2 encoding into description logics. In, (2012) International description logics workshop (DL-2012). Rome, Italy

24.

Gómez-Pérez A, del Carmen Suárez-Figueroa M (2009) Scenarios for building ontology networks within the neon methodology. In: Gil Y, Noy NF (eds) K-CAP. ACM, New York, pp 183–184

25.

Gómez-Pérez A, Fernández-López M, Corcho O (2003) Ontological Engineering with examples from the areas of knowledge management, e-commerce and the semantic web. Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., Secaucus. ISBN 1852335513

26.

Guarino N (1998) Formal ontology and information systems. In: International conference on formal ontology in information systems FOIS’98. Amsterdam, IOS Press, Trento, Italy, pp 3–15

27.

Guha R, Lenat D (1990) Cyc: a midterm report. AI Mag 11(3):32–59

28.

Halpin TA (1989) A logical analysis of information systems: static aspects of the data-oriented perspective. Ph.D. thesis, University of Queensland

29.

Halpin TA, Morgan T (2008) Information modeling and relational databases. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco

30.

Hepp M (2008) Ontologies: state of the art, business potential, and grand challenges. In: Hepp M, De Leenheer P, de Moor A, Sure Y (eds) Ontology management, semantic web and beyond computing for human experience, vol 7. Springer, Berlin, pp 3–22

31.

Heylighen F (2013) Self-organization in communicating groups: The emergence of coordination, shared references and collective intelligence. In: Massip-Bonet A, Bastardas-Boada A (eds.) Complexity Perspectives on Language, Communication and Society, Understanding Complex Systems, pp. 117–149.

32.

Hodrob R, Jarrar M (2010) Mapping orm into owl 2. In: Alnsour A, Aljawarneh S (eds) ISWSA. ACM, New York, p 9

33.

Holsapple CW, Joshi KD (2002) A collaborative approach to ontology design. Commun ACM 45:42–47CrossRef

34.

Jarrar M (2006) Position paper: towards the notion of gloss, and the adoption of linguistic resources in formal ontology engineering. In: Carr L, De Roure D, Iyengar A, Goble CA, Dahlin M (eds) WWW. ACM, New York, pp 497–503

35.

Jarrar M (2007) Mapping orm into the shoin/owl description logic. In: Meersman R, Tari Z, Herrero P (eds) OTM workshops (1). LNCS, vol 4805. Springer, Berlin, pp 729–741

36.

Jarrar M (2007) Towards automated reasoning on ORM schemes. In: Parent C, Schewe KD, Storey VC, Thalheim B (eds) ER. LNCS, vol 4801. Springer, pp 181–197

37.

Jarrar M, Meersman R (2009) Ontology engineering–the dogma approach. In: Dillon TS, Chang E, Meersman R, Sycara K (eds) Advances in Web semantics I. LNCS, vol 4891. Springer, Berlin, pp 7–34

38.

Karapiperis S, Apostolou D (2006) Consensus building in collaborative ontology engineering processes. Knowl Creat Diffus Util 1(3):199–216

39.

Keet MC (2007) Mapping the object-role modeling language ORM2 into description logic language DLRifd. CoRR abs/cs/0702089

40.

Kotis K, Vouros GA (2006) Human-centered ontology engineering: the HCOME methodology. Knowl Inf Syst 10(1):109–131CrossRef

41.

Kotis K, Vouros GA, Alonso JP (2004) HCOME: a tool-supported methodology for engineering living ontologies. In: Bussler et al. [6], pp 155–166

42.

Kowalski RA (1978) Logic for data description. In: Gallaire H, Minker J (eds.) Logic and data bases, Plenum Press, New York, pp 77–103

43.

Kunz W, Rittel H (1970) Issues as elements of information systems. Working paper 131, Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California, Berkeley, California

44.

Lenat D (1995) Cyc: a large-scale investment in knowledge infrastructure. Commun ACM 38:33–38CrossRef

45.

Lewis JR (1993) IBM computer usability satisfaction questionnaires: psychometric evaluation and instructions for use (technical report 54.786). Technical Report, IBM

46.

Lewis JR (2002) Psychometric evaluation of the pssuq using data from five years of usability studies. Int J Hum Comput Interact 14(3–4):463–488

47.

Lewis JR (2012) Usability testing. In: Handbook of human factors and ergonomics, 4 edn. Wiley, New York, pp 1267–1312

48.

Liapis A, Christiaens S, De Leenheer P (2008) Collaboration across the enterprise—an ontology-based approach for enterprise interoperability. In: Cordeiro J, Filipe J (eds) ICEIS (4), pp 255–262

49.

Mann WC, Thompson SA (1988) Rhetorical structure theory: a theory of text organization. Text 8:243–281

50.

Meersman R (1999) Semantic ontology tools in IS design. In: Ras ZW, Skowron A (eds) ISMIS. LNCS, vol 1609. Springer, Berlin, pp 30–45

51.

Meersman R, Debruyne C (2010) Hybrid ontologies and social semantics. In: Proceedings of 4th IEEE international conference on digital ecosystems and technologies (DEST 2010). IEEE Press, New York

52.

de Moor A, De Leenheer P, Meersman R (2006) DOGMA-MESS: a meaning evolution support system for interorganizational ontology engineering. In: Proceedings of the 14th international conference on conceptual structures (ICCS 2006) LNCS, vol 4068. Springer, Berlin, pp 189–203

53.

Motik B, Horrocks I, Sattler U (2007) Adding integrity constraints to owl. In: Golbreich C, Kalyanpur A, Parsia B (eds) OWLED, CEUR workshop proceedings, vol 258. CEUR-WS.org

54.

Motik B, Horrocks I, Sattler U (2009) Bridging the gap between owl and relational databases. J Web Semant 7(2):74–89CrossRef

55.

Nonnengart A, Weidenbach C (2001) Computing small clause normal forms. In: Robinson JA, Voronkov A (eds) Handbook of automated reasoning. Elsevier and MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 335–367

56.

Noy NF, McGuinness DL (2001) Ontology development 101: a guide to creating your first ontology, vol 8. Stanford knowledge systems laboratory technical report KSL-01-05 and stanford medical informatics technical report SMI-2001-0880

57.

Noy NF, Tudorache T, De Coronado S, Musen MA (2008) Developing biomedical ontologies collaboratively. AMIA annual symposium proceedings 2008, vol 520

58.

Pinto HS, Staab S, Sure Y, Tempich C (2004) Ontoedit empowering swap: a case study in supporting distributed, loosely-controlled and evolving engineering of ontologies (diligent). In: Bussler C, Davies J, Fensel D, Studer R (eds) ESWS. LNCS, vol 3053. Springer, Berlin, pp 16–30

59.

Pinto HS, Tempich C, Staab S (2009) Ontology engineering and evolution in a distributed world using DILIGENT. In: Staab S, Studer R (eds) Handbook on ontologies. Springer, Berlin, pp 153–176CrossRef

60.

Reiter R (1988) On integrity constraints. In: Vardi MY (ed) TARK. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, pp 97–111

61.

Simperl E, Tempich C (2006) Ontology engineering: a reality check. In: Meersman R, Tari Z (eds) OTM conferences (1). LNCS, vol 4275. Springer, Berlin, pp 836–854

62.

Siorpaes K, Simperl E (2010) Human intelligence in the process of semantic content creation. World Wide Web 13(1–2):33–59CrossRef

63.

Sure Y, Angele J, Staab S (2003) OntoEdit: multifaceted inferencing for ontology engineering. J Data Semant 1:128–152

64.

Sure Y, Staab S, Studer R (2009) Ontology engineering methodology. In: Bernus P, Blazewicz J, Schmidt Günter J, Shaw MJ, Staab S, Studer R (eds) Handbook on ontologies, international handbooks on information systems. Springer, Berlin, pp 135–152

65.

Tao J, Sirin E, Bao J, McGuinness DL (2010) Integrity constraints in owl. In: Fox M, Poole D (eds) AAAI. AAAI Press, Menlo Park

66.

Tudorache T, Noy NF, Tu S, Musen M (2008) Supporting collaborative ontology development in protégé. In: Sheth A, Staab S, Dean M, Paolucci M, Maynard D, Finin T, Thirunarayan K (eds) International semantic web conference. LNCS, vol 5318. Springer, Berlin, pp 17–32

67.

Tudorache T, Vendetti J, Noy NF (2008) Web-protege: a lightweight owl ontology editor for the web. In: Dolbear C, Ruttenberg A, Sattler U (eds) OWLED, CEUR workshop proceedings, vol 432. CEUR-WS.org

68.

Uschold M (1996) Building ontologies: towards a unified methodology. In: 16th Annual conference of the British computer society specialist group on, expert systems, pp 16–18

69.

Uschold M, Grüninger M (1996) Ontologies: principles, methods, and applications. Knowl Eng Rev 11(2):93–155CrossRef

70.

Uschold M, King M (1995) Towards a methodology for building ontologies. In: In workshop on basic ontological issues in knowledge sharing, held in conjunction with IJCAI-95

71.

Verheyden P, De Bo J, Meersman R (2005) Semantically unlocking database content through ontology-based mediation. In: Bussler et al. [6], pp 109–126

72.

Wintraecken J (1990) The NIAM information analysis method, theory and practice. Kluwer Academic Publishers, DordrechtMATHCrossRef

Titel: Grounding Ontologies with Social Processes and Natural Language
verfasst von: Christophe Debruyne
Trung-Kien Tran
Robert Meersman
Publikationsdatum: 01.06.2013
Verlag: Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in: Journal on Data Semantics / Ausgabe 2-3/2013
Print ISSN: 1861-2032
Elektronische ISSN: 1861-2040
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13740-013-0023-3

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2-3/2013

Special Issue on: Evolution and Versioning in Semantic Data Integration Systems

Ontology Change Management and Identification of Change Patterns

A Framework for Alignment of Data and Processes Architectures Applied in a Government Institution

Improving Business Process Model Quality Using Domain Ontologies

DYNAMO-MAS: a Multi-Agent System for Ontology Evolution from Text

Premium Partner