Melinda McDaniel
Skip Abstract Section
Skip Supplemental Material SectionAbstract
The number of applications being developed that require access to knowledge about the real world has increased rapidly over the past two decades. Domain ontologies, which formalize the terms being used in a discipline, have become essential for research in areas such as Machine Learning, the Internet of Things, Robotics, and Natural Language Processing, because they enable separate systems to exchange information. The quality of these domain ontologies, however, must be ensured for meaningful communication. Assessing the quality of domain ontologies for their suitability to potential applications remains difficult, even though a variety of frameworks and metrics have been developed for doing so. This article reviews domain ontology assessment efforts to highlight the work that has been carried out and to clarify the important issues that remain. These assessment efforts are classified into five distinct evaluation approaches and the state of the art of each described. Challenges associated with domain ontology assessment are outlined and recommendations are made for future research and applications.
Supplemental Material
Available for Download
pdf
a70-mcdaniel_supplementary_references.pdf (736.4 KB)
Supplementary references
- Manel Achichi, Michelle Cheatham, Zlatan Dragisic, Jérôme Euzenat, Daniel Faria, Alfio Ferrara, and Ernesto Jiménez-Ruiz. 2016. Results of the 2016 ontology alignment evaluation initiative. In CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 1766. 73--129.Google Scholar
- Stephanie Abimbola Ajetunmobi and Olawande Daramola. 2017. Ontology-based information extraction for subject-focussed automatic essay evaluation. In 2017 International Conference on Computing Networking and Informatics (ICCNI’17). 1--6.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Joel Adams and Steven Bedrick. 2014. Automatic classification of Pubmed abstracts with latent semantic indexing: Working notes. In CLEF (Working Notes). 1275--1282.Google Scholar
- Fawaz S. Al-Anzi and Dia AbuZeina. 2017. Toward an enhanced Arabic text classification using cosine similarity and latent semantic indexing. Journal of King Saud University-Computer and Information Sciences 29, 2 (2017), 189--195.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Khalid Albarrak and Edgar Sibley. 2012. Measuring expressivity between ontology models. In Proceedings of the 11th WSEAS International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Knowledge Engineering and Data Bases (AIKED’12). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hend S. Al-Khalifa, Maha M. Al-Yahya, Alia Bahanshal, and Iman Al-Odah. 2012. On the evaluation of linguistic ontological models: An application on the SEMQ ontology. In 2012 7th International Conference on Digital Information Management (ICDIM’12). 341--345Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kiehl Alm, B. Lantow, and K. Sandkuhl. 2013. Applicability of quality metrics for ontologies on ontology design patterns. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Ontology Development (KEOD’13). 48--57.Google Scholar
- Maziar Amirhosseini and Juhana Salim. 2011. Ontoabsolute as an ontology evaluation methodology in analysis of the structural domains in upper, middle and lower level ontologies. In 2011 International Conference on Semantic Technology and Information Retrieval (STAIR’11). 26--33.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jamshaid Ashraf, Omar K. Hussain, Farookh Khadeer Hussain, and Elizabeth J. Chang. 2018. Evaluation of u ontology. In Measuring and Analysing the Use of Ontologies. Springer, Cham, 243--268.Google Scholar
- Mauricio Barcellos Almeida. 2009. A proposal to evaluate ontology content. Applied Ontology 4, 3 (2009), 245--265. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ritika Bansal and Sonal Chawla. 2015. Evaluation metrics for computer science domain specific ontology in semantic web based IRSCSD system. International Journal of Computer (IJC) 19, 1 (2015), 129--139.Google Scholar
- Michael Atkins. 2017. FIBO ontologies by domain and module. Retrieved from https://edmcouncil.org.Google Scholar
- Kenneth Baclawski, Mike Bennett, Gary Berg-Cross, Donna Fritzsche, and Andrea Westerninen. 2017. Ontology summit 2017 communiqué - ai, learning, reasoning and ontologies. Applied Ontology 13, 1 (2017), 3--18.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Niyati Baliyan and Sandeep Kumar. 2016. A behavioral metrics suite for modular ontologies. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Information and Communication Technology for Competitive Strategies. ACM, 133. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Judson Bandeira, Ig Ibert Bittencourt, Patricia Espinheira, and Seiji Isotani. FOCA: A methodology for ontology evaluation. Arxiv Preprint Arxiv:1612.03353.Google Scholar
- Montserrat Batet and David Sánchez. 2014. A semantic approach for ontology evaluation. In IEEE 26th International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI’14). IEEE, 138--145. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mike Bennett. 2013. The financial industry business ontology: Best practice for big data. 2013. Journal of Banking Regulation 14, 3--4 (2013), 255--268.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Pooyan Ramezani Besheli. 2018. The pattern of patterns: What is a pattern in conceptual modeling? In 12th International Workshop on Value Modeling and Business Ontologies (VMBO’18). 99--106.Google Scholar
- Kent D. Bimson and Richard D. Hull. 2016. Unnatural language processing: Characterizing the challenges in translating natural language semantics into ontology semantics. In Semantic Web. 119--135.Google Scholar
- Christian Bizer, Tom Heath, and Tim Berners-Lee. 2009. Linked data-the story so far. In Semantic Services, Interoperability and Web Applications: Emerging Concepts. 205--227.Google Scholar
- Palash Bera, Andrew Burton-Jones, and Yair Wand. 2014. Research note-how semantics and pragmatics interact in understanding conceptual models. Information Systems Research 25, 2 (2014), 401--419. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tim Berners-Lee, James Hendler, and Ora Lassila. 2001. The semantic web. Scientific American. 284, 5 (2001), 28--37.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Olivier Bodenreider. 2004. The unified medical language system (UMLS): Integrating biomedical terminology. Nucleic Acids Research 32, Suppl 1 (2004), D267--D270Google ScholarCross Ref
- Oliver Bodenreider. 2018. Evaluating the Quality and Interoperability of Biomedical Terminologies. Lister Hill Nation Center for Biomedical Communications. https://lhncbc.nlm.nih.gov/system/files/pub9754.pdf.Google Scholar
- Janez Brank, Marko Grobelnik, and Dunja Mladenić. 2007. Automatic evaluation of ontologies. In Natural Language Processing and Text Mining. 193--219.Google Scholar
- John G. Breslin, Stefan Decker, Andreas Harth, and Uldis Bojars. 2006. SIOC: An approach to connect web-based communities. International Journal of Web Based Communities 2, 2 (2006), 133--142. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Christopher Brewster, Harith Alani, Srinandan Dasmahapatra, and Yorick Wilks. 2004. Data driven ontology evaluation. In International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation. 24--30.Google Scholar
- Susan Brown, Claire Bonial, Leo Obrst, and Martha Palmer. 2017. The rich event ontology. In Proceedings of the Events and Stories in the News Workshop. 87--97.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Paul Buitelaar, Thomas Eigner, and Thierry Declerck. 2004. OntoSelect: A dynamic ontology library with support for ontology selection. In Proceedings of the Demo Session at the International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC’04).Google Scholar
- Andrew Burton-Jones, Veda C. Storey, Vijayan Sugumaran, and Punit Ahluwalia. 2005. A semiotic metrics suite for assessing the quality of ontologies. Data and Knowledge Engineering 55, 1 (2005), 84--102. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Cecilia Camporeale, Antonio De Nicola, and Maria Luisa Villani. 2015. Semantics-based services for a low carbon society: An application on emissions trading system data and scenarios management. Environmental Modelling 8 Software 64 (2015), 124--142. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Michal Campr and Karel Ježek. 2015. Comparing semantic models for evaluating automatic document summarization. In International Conference on Text, Speech, and Dialogue. Springer, Cham, 252--260. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ricardo Chalmeta and Verónica Pazos. 2015. A step-by-step methodology for enterprise interoperability projects. Enterprise Information Systems. 9, 4 (2015), 436--464. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Balakrishnan Chandrasekaran, John R. Josephson, and V. Richard Benjamins. 1999. What are ontologies, and why do we need them? IEEE Intelligent Systems 1 (1999), 20--26. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Michelle Cheatham and Catia Pesquita. 2017. Semantic data integration. In Handbook of Big Data Technologies. Springer, 263--305.Google Scholar
- Jianpeng Cheng and Mirella Lapata. 2106. Neural summarization by extracting sentences and words. Arxiv Preprint ArXiv:1603.07252.Google Scholar
- Namyoun Choi, Il-Yeol Song, and Hyoil Han. 2006. A survey on ontology mapping. ACM SIGMOD Record 35, 3 (2006), 34--41. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Djellali Choukri. 2014. A new distributed expert system to ontology evaluation. Procedia Computer Science 37 (2014), 48--55.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mihai Codescu, Eugen Kuksa, Oliver Kutz, Till Mossakowski, and Fabian Neuhaus. 2017. Ontohub: A semantic repository engine for heterogeneous ontologies. Applied Ontology 12, 3--4 (2017), 275--298.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Licong Cui, Wei Zhu, Shiqiang Tao, James T. Case, Olivier Bodenreider, and Cuo-Qiang Zhang. 2017. Mining non-lattice subgraphs for detecting missing hierarchical relations and concepts in SNOMED CT. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 24, 4 (2017), 788--798.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kathleen Dahlgren. 1995. A linguistic ontology. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 43, 5 (1995), 809--818. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. P. de Villiers, R. W. Focke, G. Pavlin, A. L. Jousselme, V. Dragos, K. B. Laskey, P. C. Costa, and E. Blasch. 2017. Evaluation metrics for the practical application of URREF ontology: An illustration on data criteria. In 2017 20th International Conference on Information Fusion (Fusion’17). 1--8.Google Scholar
- Auriol Degbelo. 2017. A snapshot of ontology evaluation criteria and strategies. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Semantic Systems. ACM, 1--8. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Syamala Devi and Himani Mittal. 2016. Machine learning techniques with ontology for subjective answer evaluation. Arxiv Preprint Arxiv:1605.02442.Google Scholar
- Michael Dibley, Haijiang Li, Yacine Rezgui, and John Miles. 2012. An ontology framework for intelligent sensor-based building monitoring. Automation in Construction 28 (2012), 1--14.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Astrid Duque-Ramos, Jesualdo Tomas Fernández-Breis, Robert David Stevens, and Nathalie Aussenac-Gilles. 2011. OQuaRE: A SQuaRE-based approach for evaluating the quality of ontologies. Journal of Research and Practice in Information Technology 43, 2 (2011), 159.Google Scholar
- Astrid Duque-Ramos, Martin Boeker, Ludger Jansen, Stefan Schulz, Miguela Iniesta, and Jesualdo Tomás Fernández-Breis. 2014. Evaluating the good ontology design guideline (GoodOD) with the ontology quality requirements and evaluation method and metrics (OQuaRE). PloS One 9, 8 (2014), e104463.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mathieu d'Aquin, Anne Schlicht, Heiner Stuckenschmidt, and Marta Sabou. 2007, September. Ontology modularization for knowledge selection: Experiments and evaluations. In International Conference on Database and Expert Systems Applications. Springer, 874--883. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mathieu d'Aquin and Natalya F. Noy. 2012. Where to publish and find ontologies? A survey of ontology libraries. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 11 (2012), 96--111. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Donna Marie DeCarolis and David L. Deeds. 1999. The impact of stocks and flows of organizational knowledge on firm performance: An empirical investigation of the biotechnology industry. Strategic Management Journal 20, 10 (1999), 953--968.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Faezeh Ensan and Weichang Du. 2013. A semantic metrics suite for evaluating modular ontologies. Information Systems 38 (2013), 5. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tamar A. El-Diraby, Lima Celson, and B. Feis. 2005. Domain taxonomy for construction concepts: Toward a formal ontology for construction knowledge. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering 19, 4 (2005), 394--406.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jérôme Euzenat. 2001, August. Towards a principled approach to semantic interoperability. In Proceedings of the IJCAI 2001 Workshop on Ontology and Information Sharing. 19--25.Google Scholar
- Nicholas Evangelopoulos, Xiaoni Zhang, and Victor R. Prybutok. 2012. Latent semantic analysis: Five methodological recommendations. European Journal of Information Systems 21, 1 (2012), 70--86.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Muhammad Fahad and Muhammad Abdul Qadir. 2008. A framework for ontology evaluation. ICCS Supplement 354 (2008), 149--158.Google Scholar
- Ricardo de Almeida Falbo, Monalessa Perini Barcellos, Julio Cesar Nardi, and Giancarlo Guizzardi. 2013. Organizing ontology design patterns as ontology pattern languages. In Extended Semantic Web Conference. Springer, Berlin, 61--75.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Christiane Fellbaum. 1998. WordNet. In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
- Donna Fritzsche, Michael Grüninger, Ken Baclawski, Mike Bennett, Gary Berg-Cross, Todd Schneider, Ram Sriram, Mark Underwood, and Andrea Westerinen. 2017. Ontology summit 2016 communique: Ontologies within semantic interoperability ecosystems. Applied Ontology 12, 2 (2017), 91--111.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Salvatore Gaglio and Giuseppe Lo Re. 2014. Advances onto the Internet of Things. Springer, 349. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Aldo Gangemi, Nicolar Guarino, Claudio Masolo, Alessandro Oltramari, and Luc Schneider 2002. Sweetening ontologies with DOLCE. In Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management: Ontologies and the Semantic Web. 166--181. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Aldo Gangemi, Carola Catenacci, Massimiliano Ciaramita, and Jos Lehmann 2006. Modelling ontology evaluation and validation. In The Semantic Web: Research and Applications. 140--154. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jort F. Gemmeke, Daniel P. W. Ellis, Dylan Freedman, Aren Jansen, Wade Lawrence, R. Channing Moore, Manoj Plakal, and Marvin Ritter. 2017. Audio Set: An ontology and human-labeled dataset for audio events. In IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP'17). 776--780.Google ScholarCross Ref
- John H. Gennari, Mark A. Musen, Ray W. Fergerson, William E. Grosso, Monica Crubézy, Henrik Eriksson, and Samson W. Tu. 2003. The evolution of protégé: An environment for knowledge-based systems development. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 58, 1 (2003), 89--12. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Toader Gherasim, Giuseppe Berio, Mounira Harzallah, and Pascale Kuntz. 2012. Problems impacting the quality of automatically built ontologies. In Knowledge Engineering and Software Engineering (KESE8’12). 22.Google Scholar
- Asunción Gómez-Pérez. 1996. Towards a framework to verify knowledge sharing technology. Expert Systems with Applications 11, 4 (1996), 519--529.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Asunción Gómez‐Pérez. 2001. Evaluation of ontologies. International Journal of Intelligent Systems. 16, 3 (2001), 391--409.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Asunción Gómez-Pérez. 2004. Ontology evaluation. In Handbook on Ontologies. 251--273.Google Scholar
- Rafael S. Gonçalves, Martin J. O'Connor, Marcos Martínez-Romero, John Graybeal, and Mark A. Musen. 2017. Metadata in the biosample online repository are impaired by numerous anomalies. ArXiv Preprint Arxiv:1708.01286 2017.Google Scholar
- Sotirios K. Goudos, Vassilios Peristeras, and Konstantinos Tarabanis. 2006. Mapping citizen profiles to public administration services using ontology implementations of the governance enterprise architecture GEA models. In Proceedings of 3rd Annual European Semantic Web Conference. 25--37.Google Scholar
- Thomas R. Gruber 1993. A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowledge Acquisition 5, 2 (1993), 199--220. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Thomas R. Gruber. 1995. Toward principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 43, 5 (1995), 907--928. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Michael Grüninger, Torsten Hahmann, Ali Hashemi, Darren Ong, and Atalay Ozgovde. 2012. Modular first-order ontologies via repositories. Applied Ontology 7, 2 (2012), 169--209. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Michael Grüninger and Megan Katsumi. 2012. Specifying ontology design patterns with an ontology repository. In WOP. 929.Google Scholar
- Nicola Guarino and Christopher Welty. 2002. Evaluating ontological decisions with Ontoclean. Communications of the ACM 45, 2 (2002), 61--65. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nicola Guarino, Daniel Oberle, and Steffen Staab. 2009. What is an ontology? In Handbook on Ontologies. 1--17.Google Scholar
- Nicola Guarino and Mark A. Musen. 2005. Applied ontology: Focusing on content. Applied Ontology 1, 1 (2005), 1--5. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nicola Guarino and Mark Alan Musen. 2015. Applied ontology: The next decade begins. Applied Ontology 10, 3--4 (2015), 1--4.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Nicola Guarino and Giancarlo Guizzardi. 2016. Relationships and events: Towards a general theory of reification and truthmaking. In Conference of the Italian Association for Artificial Intelligence. Springer, Cham, 237--249. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nicola Guarino. 2017. BFO and DOLCE: So Far, so close. In Cosmos Taxis 4.Google Scholar
- Giancarlo Guizzardi. 2007. On ontology, ontologies, conceptualizations, modeling languages, and meta models. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications 155 (2007), 18.Google Scholar
- Giancarlo Guizzardi. 2010. Theoretical foundations and engineering tools for building ontologies as reference conceptual models. Semantic Web 1, 2 (2010), 3--10. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Giancarlo Guizzardi, Ricardo de Almeida Falbo, and Renata S. S. Guizzardi. 2008. Grounding software domain ontologies in the unified foundational ontology UFO: The case of the ODE software process ontology. In CIbSE. 127--140.Google Scholar
- Giancarlo Guizzardi, Luis Ferreira Pires, and Marten J. Van Sinderen. 2002. On the role of domain ontologies in the design of domain-specific visual modeling languages. In Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Domain-Specific Visual Languages.Google Scholar
- Giancarlo Guizzardi, Gerd Wagner, João Paulo Andrade Almeida, and Renata S. S. Guizzardi. 2015. Towards ontological foundations for conceptual modeling: The unified foundational ontology (UFO) story. Applied Ontology 10, 3--4 (2015), 259--271.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Byeong-Jun, Han, Seungmin Rho, Sanghoon Jun, and Eenjun Hwang. 2010. Music emotion classification and context-based music recommendation. Multimedia Tools and Applications 47, 3 (2010), 433--460. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jens Hartmann, Peter Spyns, Alain Giboin, Diana Maynard, Roberta Cuel, Mari Carmen Suárez-Figueroa, and York Sure. 2005. D1.2.3 methods for ontology evaluation. EU-IST Network of Excellence NoE IST-2004-507482 KWEB Deliverable D1.Google Scholar
- Jim Hendler and Tim Berners-Lee. 2010. From the semantic web to social machines: A research challenge for AI on the world wide web. Artificial Intelligence 174, 2 (2010), 156--161. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Martin Hepp, Daniel Bachlechner, and Katharina Siorpaes. 2006. OntoWiki: Community-driven ontology engineering and ontology usage based on wikis. In Proceedings of the 2006 International Symposium on Wikis. ACM. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Martin Hepp. 2007. Possible ontologies: How reality constrains the development of relevant ontologies. 2007. IEEE Internet Computing 11 (2007), 1. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Amanda Hicks. 2017. Metrics and methods for comparative ontology evaluation. Ciência da Informação 46 (2017), 1.Google Scholar
- Julia Hirschberg and Christopher D. Manning. 2015. Advances in natural language processing. Science 349, 6245 (2015), 261--266.Google Scholar
- Hlomani Hlomani and Deborah Stacey. 2014. Approaches, methods, metrics, measures, and subjectivity in ontology evaluation: A survey. Semantic Web and Information Systems 1, 5 (2014), 1--11.Google Scholar
- Mike Hobbs, Cristina Luca, Arooj Fatima, and Mark Warnes. 2014. Ontological analysis for dynamic data model exploration. Electronic Journal of Applied Statistical Analysis: Decision Support Systems and Services Evaluation 5, 1 (2014), 42--56.Google Scholar
- Robert Hoehndorf, Michel Dumontier, and Georgios V. Gkoutos. 2012. Evaluation of research in biomedical ontologies. In Briefings in Bioinformatics. bbs053.Google Scholar
- James Huang, Stephanie Rogers, and Eunkwang Joo. 2014. Improving restaurants by extracting subtopics from yelp reviews. In iConference 2014 (Social Media Expo).Google Scholar
- Khairul Nurmazianna Ismail. 2014. Development of durian ontology from unstructured text and external knowledge source. PhD diss., Universiti Teknologi MARA.Google Scholar
- Marzanah A. Jabar, Mustafa Salah Khalefa, Rusli H. Abdullah, and Salfarina Abdullah. 2014. Meta-analysis of ontology software development process. International Review on Computers and Software (IRECOS) 9, 1 (2014), 29--37.Google Scholar
- Dean Jones. 1998. Developing shared ontologies in multi-agent systems. In ECAI’98 Workshop on Intelligent Information Integration.Google Scholar
- Yong-Bin Kang, Yuan-Fang Li, and Shonali Krishnaswamy. 2012. Predicting reasoning performance using ontology metrics. In The Semantic Web (ISWC’12). 198--214. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Pavandeep Kataria, Radmila Juric, Shamimabi Paurobally, and Kambiz Madani. 2008. Implementation of ontology for intelligent hospital wards. In Proceedings of the 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. IEEE, 253--253. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Megan Katsumi and Michael Grüninger. 2017. Choosing ontologies for reuse. Applied Ontology 12, 3--4 (2017), 195--221.Google ScholarCross Ref
- C. Maria Keet, Mari Carmen Suarez-Figueroa, and Maria Poveda-Villalon. 2013. The current landscape of pitfalls in ontologies. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Ontology Development.Google Scholar
- Zubeida Casmod Khan and C. Maria Keet. 2015. An empirically-based framework for ontology modularisation. Applied Ontology 10, 3--4 (2015), 171--195.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Zubeida Casmod Khan and C. Maria Keet. 2016. ROMULUS: The repository of ontologies for MULtiple USes populated with mediated foundational ontologies. Journal on Data Semantics. 5, 1 (2016), 19--36.Google ScholarCross Ref
- M. Rahamatullah Khondoker and Paul Mueller. 2010. Comparing ontology development tools based on an online survey. In World Congress on Engineering (WCE 10).Google Scholar
- Jongwoo Kim and Veda C. Storey. 2012. Ontologies: Sourcing the World Wide Web. In Organizational Efficiency through Intelligent Information Technologies. 65.Google Scholar
- Caroline Chepkoech Kiptoo, Aurona Gerber, and Alta Van der Merwe. 2016. Towards citizen-expert knowledge exchange for biodiversity informatics: A conceptual architecture. African Journal of Information and Communication 18 (2016), 33--54.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Philip Kitcher. 1995. The advancement of science: Science without legend, objectivity without illusion. Oxford University Press, 432 pages.Google Scholar
- John Krogstie. 2012. Model-Based Development and Evolution of Information Systems: A Quality Approach. Springer. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Oliver Kutz and Joana Hois. 2012. Modularity in ontologies. Applied Ontology 7, 2 (2012), 109--112. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Axel van Lamsweerde. 2001. Goal-oriented requirements engineering: A guided tour. In Proceedings of the 5th IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering. IEEE, 249--262. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Christoph Lange. 2013. Ontologies and languages for representing mathematical knowledge on the Semantic Web. Semantic Web 4, 2 (2013), 119--158. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kai R. Larsen, David E. Monarchi, Dirk S. Hovorka, and Christopher N. Bailey. 2008. Analyzing unstructured text data: Using latent categorization to identify intellectual communities in information systems. Decision Support Systems 45, 4 (2008), 884--896. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kai R. Larsen, Susan Michie, Eric B. Hekler, Bryan Gibson, Donna Spruijt-Metz, David Ahern, and Heather Cole-Lewis. 2017. Behavior change interventions: The potential of ontologies for advancing science and practice. Journal of Behavioral Medicine. Springer 40, 1 (2017), 6--22.Google Scholar
- Dong Joon Lee and Besiki Stvilia. 2017. Practices of research data curation in institutional repositories: A qualitative view from repository staff. PloS One 12, 3 (2017), e0173987.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Douglas B. Lenat. 1995. CYC: A large-scale investment in knowledge infrastructure. Communications of the ACM 38, 11 (1995), 33--38. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Danfeng Liu, Antonis Bikakis, and Andreas Vlachidis. 2017. Evaluation of semantic web ontologies for modelling art collections. In Advances in Databases and Information Systems. Springer, Cham, 343--352.Google Scholar
- Adolfo Lozano-Tello and Asunción Gómez-Pérez. 2004. Ontometric: A method to choose the appropriate ontology. Journal of Database Management 2, 15 (2004), 1--18.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Roman Lukyanenko and Jeffrey Parsons 2018. Beyond micro-tasks: Research opportunities in observational crowdsourcing. Journal of Database Management (JDM) 291 (2018), 1--22. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Yinglong Ma, Beihong Jin, and Yulin Feng. 2010. Semantic oriented ontology cohesion metrics for ontology-based systems. Journal of Systems and Software 83, 1 (2010), 143--152. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Yinglong Ma, Ling Liu, Ke Lu, Beihong Jin, and Xiangje Liu. 2014. A graph derivation based approach for measuring and comparing structural semantics of ontologies. Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 26, 5 (2014), 1039--1052. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Alexander Maedche and Raphael Volz. 2012. The ontology extraction and maintenance framework Text-To-Onto. In Proceedings on the Workshop on Integrating Data Mining and Knowledge Management.Google Scholar
- Marcos Martínez-Romero, Clement Jonquet, Martin J. O'Connor, John Graybeal, Alejandro Pazos, and Mark A. Musen. 2017. NCBO Ontology Recommender 2.0: An enhanced approach for biomedical ontology recommendation. Journal of Biomedical Semantics 8, 1 (2017), 21.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Natalia Maslova and Vsevolod Potapov. 2017. Neural network doc2vec in automated sentiment analysis for short informal texts. In International Conference on Speech and Computer. 546--554.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Cynthia Matuszek, John Cabral, Michael J. Witbrock, and John DeOliveira. 2006. An introduction to the syntax and content of cyc. In AAAI Spring Symposium: Formalizing and Compiling Background Knowledge and Its Applications to Knowledge Representation and Question Answering. 44--49.Google Scholar
- Melinda McDaniel, Veda C. Storey, and Vijayan Sugumaran. 2018. Assessing the quality of domain ontologies: Metrics and an automated ranking system. Data and Knowledge Engineering 115 (2018), 32--47.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rada Mihalcea and Paul Tarau. Textrank: Bringing order into text. In Proceedings of the 2004 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing.Google Scholar
- David Milne and Ian H. Witten. 2013. An open-source toolkit for mining Wikipedia. Artificial Intelligence 194 (2013), 222--239. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Till Mossakowski, Oliver Kutz, and Mihai Codescu. 2014. Ontohub: A semantic repository for heterogeneous ontologies. In Proceedings of DACS’14.Google Scholar
- Sandeep Sricharan Mukku, Nurendra Choudhary, and Radhika Mamidi. 2016. Enhanced sentiment classification of Telugu text using ML techniques. In SAAIP@ IJCAI. 29--34.Google Scholar
- Mark A. Musen. 2015. The protégé project: A look back and a look forward. AI Matters 1, 4 (2015), 4--12. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Fabian Neuhaus, Amanda Vizedom, Ken Baclawski, Mike Bennett, Mike Dean, Michael Denny, and Peter Yim. 2013. Towards ontology evaluation across the life cycle: The ontology summit 2013. Applied Ontology 8, 3 (2013), 179--194. Google ScholarDigital Library
- José Ángel Noguera-Arnaldos, Mario Andrés Paredes-Valverde, María Pilar Salas-Zárate, Miguel Ángel Rodríguez-García, Rafael Valencia-García, and José Luis Ochoa. 2017. IM4 Things: An ontology-based natural language interface for controlling devices in the internet of things. In Current Trends on Knowledge-Based Systems. 3--22.Google Scholar
- Natalya F. Noy, Nigam H. Shah, Patricia L. Whetzel, Benjamin Dai, Michael Dorf, Nicholas Griffith, and Mark A. Musen. 2009. BioPortal: Ontologies and integrated data resources at the click of a mouse. Nucleic Acids Research 29, 3 (supp. 2) (2009), W170--173.Google Scholar
- Leo Obrst, Pattrick Cassidy, Steven R. Ray, Bradford Smith, Dagobert Soergel, Matthew West, and Peter Yim. 2006. The 2006 Upper Ontology Summit Joint Communiqué. Applied Ontology 1, 2 (2006), 203--211. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Leo Obrst, Werner Ceusters, Inderjeet Mani, Steve Ray, and Barry Smith. 2007. Evaluation of ontologies toward improved semantic interoperability. Semantic Web: Revolutionizing Knowledge Discovery in the Life Sciences, Vol. 9780387484389. Springer US, 139--58.Google Scholar
- Leo Obrst, Mark Musen, Barry Smith, Fabian Neuhaus, Frank Olken, Mike Grüninger, M. Raymond, Patrick Hayes, and Raj Sharma. 2008. Ontology Summit 2008: Towards an open ontology repository. http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/OntologySummit2008_Communique.html.Google Scholar
- Leo Obrst and Patrick Cassidy. 2011. The need for ontologies: Bridging the barriers of terminology and data structure. Geological Society of America Special Papers 482 (2011), 99--123.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Leo Obrst, Arturo Sanchez, Amanda Vizedom, Peter Yim, and Barry Smith. 2011. Ontology summit 2010: Creating the ontologists of the future. Applied Ontology 6 (2011), 91--98. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Leo Obrst, Michael Grüninger, Kenneth Baclawski, Mike Bennett, Dan Brickley, Gary Berg-Cross, and Peter Yim. 2014. Semantic web and big data meets applied ontology: The Ontology Summit 2014. Applied Ontology 9, 2 (2014), 155--170. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Sunju Oh, Heon Y. Yeom, and Joongho Ahn. 2011. Cohesion and coupling metrics for ontology modules. Information Technology and Management 12, 2 (2011), 81--96. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ontology Evaluation Across the Ontology Lifecycle. 2013. Retrieved from https://www.zotero.org/groups/ontologysummit2013.Google Scholar
- Anthony M. Orme, Haining Tao, and Letha H. Etzkorn. 2006. Coupling metrics for ontology-based system. IEEE Software 23, 2 (2006), 102--108. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Liubo Ouyang, Beiji Zou, Miaoxing Qu, and Chengming Zhang. 2011. A method of ontology evaluation based on coverage, cohesion and coupling. In 8th International Conference on Fuzzy Systems and Knowledge Discovery (FSKD’11). IEEE, 2451--2455.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jinsoo Park, Wonchin Cho, and Sangkyu Rho. 2007. Evaluation framework for automatic ontology extraction tools: An experiment. In On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems 2007: OTM 2007 Workshops. Springer, Berlin, 511--521. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jeffrey Parsons and Yair Wand. 2008. Using cognitive principles to guide classification in information systems modeling. MIS Quarterly 32, 4 (2008), 839--868. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Heilo Paulheim, Sven Hertling, and Dominique Ritze. 2013. Towards evaluating interactive ontology matching tools. In The Semantic Web: Semantics and Big Datapp. Springer, Berlin, 31--45.Google Scholar
- Charith Perera, Arkady Zaslavsky, Peter Christen, and Dimitrios Georgakopoulos. 2014. Context aware computing for the Internet of Things: A survey. IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorials 16, 1 (2014), 414--454.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Perrine Pittet and Jérôme Barthélémy. 2015. Exploiting users' feedbacks: Towards a task-based evaluation of application ontologies throughout their lifecycle. In International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Ontology Development, 2. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Robert Porzel and Rainer Malaka. 2004. A task-based approach for ontology evaluation. In ECAI Workshop on Ontology Learning and Population.Google Scholar
- María Poveda-Villalón, Mari Carmen Suárez-Figueroa, and Asunción Gómez-Pérez. 2012. Validating ontologies with Oops! knowledge engineering and knowledge management. In 18th International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management. Springer, 267--281. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Maria Poveda-Villalón, Asunción Gómez-Pérez, and Mari Carmen Suárez-Figueroa. 2014. Oops! ontology pitfall scanner!: An on-line tool for ontology evaluation. International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems (IJSWIS) 102 (2014), 7--34. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Sandeep Purao and Veda C. Storey. 2005. A multi-layered ontology for comparing relationship semantics in conceptual models of databases. Applied Ontology 1, 1 (2005), 117--139. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Radim Řehřek and Petr Sojka. 2011. Gensim—statistical semantics in python. In Statistical Semantics; Gensim; Python; LDA; SVD.Google Scholar
- David Riaño, Francis Real, Joan Albert López-Vallverdú, Fabio Campana, Sara Ercolani, Patrizia Mecocci, Roberta Annicchiarico, and Carlo Caltagirone. 2012. An ontology-based personalization of health-care knowledge to support clinical decisions for chronically ill patients. Journal of Biomedical Informatics 45, 3 (2012), 429--446. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mariela Rico, María Laura Caliusco, Omar Chiotti, and María Rosa Galli. 2014. OntoQualitas: A framework for ontology quality assessment in information interchanges between heterogeneous systems. Computers in Industry 65, 9 (2014), 1291--1300. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Peter Rittgen. 2010. Quality and perceived usefulness of process models. In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing. ACM, 65--72. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Dumitru Roman, Uwe Keller, Holger Lausen, Jos de Bruijn, Rubén Lara, Michael Stollberg, and Dieter Fensel. 2005. Web service modeling ontology. Applied Ontology 1, 1 (2005), 77--106. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rosetta Romano and Craig McDonald. 2011. Assessing the quality of ontology. In MCIS 2011 Proceedings. Paper 50.Google Scholar
- Rajendra Kumar Roul and Sanjay Kumar Sahay. 2014. An effective approach for web document classification using the concept of association analysis of data mining. Arxiv Preprint Arxiv:1406.5616.Google Scholar
- Ahmed R. Sadik and Bodo Urban. 2017. An ontology-based approach to enable knowledge representation and reasoning in worker--Cobot agile manufacturing. Future Internet 9, 4 (2017), 90.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Andreas Scheuermann and Joerg Leukel. 2014. Task ontology for supply chain planning—a literature review. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing 27, 8 (2014), 719--732. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Daniel Schober, Ilinca Tudose, Vojtěch Svatek, and Martin Boeker. 2012. OntoCheck: Verifying ontology naming conventions and metadata completeness in protégé 4. Journal of Biomedical Semantics 3 (2012), S2--S4.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Todd Schneider, Ali Hashemi, Mike Bennett, Mary Brady, Cory Casanave, Henson Graves, Michael Grüninger, Nicola Guarino, Anatoly Levenchuk, Ernie Lucier, Leo Obrst, Steve Ray, Ram D. Sriram, Amanda Vizedom, Matthew West, Trish Whetzel, and Peter Yim. 2012. Ontology for big systems: The ontology summit 2012 communique. Applied Ontology 7, 3 (2012), 357--371. Google ScholarDigital Library
- David G. Schwartz. 2014. Enhancing knowledge marketplaces through the theory of knowledge measurement. In Handbook of Strategic e-Business Management. 735--748.Google Scholar
- Dudley Shapere. 1984. Scientific theories and their domains. In Reason and the Search for Knowledge. Springer, 273--319.Google Scholar
- M. Shoaib, K. Kalsoom, S. Majid, and F. Majeed. 2011. Software metrics for an efficient design of ontologies. Pakistan Journal of Science 63 (2011), 1.Google Scholar
- Anna Sidorova, Nicholas Evangelopoulos, Joseph S. Valacich, and Thiagarajan Ramakrishnan 2008. Uncovering the intellectual core of the information systems discipline. MIS Quarterly 32, 3 (2008), 467--482. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ayrton Silva, Luiz Carlos Chaves, and Damires Souza. 2013. A domain-based approach to publish data on the web. In Proceedings of International Conference on Information Integration and Web-Based Applications 8 Services. ACM, 344. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bhaskar Sinha, Megha Garg, and Somnath Chandra. 2016. Identification and classification of relations for Indian languages using machine learning approaches for developing a domain specific ontology. In Computational Techniques in Information and Communication Technologies (ICCTICT’16). IEEE, 415--420.Google Scholar
- Barry Smith, Michael Ashburner, Cornelius Rosse, Johnathan Bard, William Bug, Werner Ceusters, Loius J. Goldberg, Karen Eilbeck, Amelia Ireland, Christopher J. Mungall, and Neocles Leontis. 2007. The OBO foundry: Coordinated evolution of ontologies to support biomedical data integration. Nature Biotechnology 25, 11 (2007), 1251--1255.Google ScholarCross Ref
- John F. Sowa. 2000. Ontology, metadata, and semiotics. In International Conference on Conceptual Structures. Springer, 55--81. Google ScholarDigital Library
- John F. Sowa. 2006. The challenge of knowledge soup. Research Trends in Science, Technology and Mathematics Education (2006), 55--90.Google Scholar
- John F. Sowa 2010. The role of logic and ontology in language and reasoning. In Theory and Applications of Ontology: Philosophical Perspectives. Springer, 231--263.Google Scholar
- John F. Sowa (Ed.). 2014. Principles of semantic networks: Explorations in the representation of knowledge. Morgan Kaufmann publishers Inc.Google Scholar
- John F. Sowa. 2015. Signs and reality. Applied Ontology 10, 3--4 (2015), 273--284.Google ScholarCross Ref
- John F. Sowa. 2018. Ontology standards: History, lessons, and warnings. Retrieved from http://jfsowa.com/temp/ontostan.pdf.Google Scholar
- Ronald Stamper, Kecheng Liu, Mark Hafkamp, and Yasser Ades. 2000. Understanding the roles of signs and norms in organizations—a semiotic approach to information systems design. Behaviour and Information Technology 19, 1 (2000), 15--27.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Veda C. Storey and Bernhard Thalheim. 2017. Conceptual modeling: Enhancement through semiotics. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Conceptual Modeling. Springer, Cham, 182--190.Google Scholar
- Darijus Strasunskas and Stein L. Tomassen. 2008. The role of ontology in enhancing semantic searches: The EvOQS framework and its initial validation. International Journal of Knowledge and Learning 4, 4 (2008), 398--414.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Vijayan Sugumaran and Veda C. Storey. 2006. The role of domain ontologies in database design: An ontology management and conceptual modeling environment. ACM Transactions on Database Systems (TODS) 31, 3 (2006), 1064--1094. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Besiki Stvilia. 2007. A model for ontology quality evaluation. First Monday 12 (2007), 12.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mari Carmen Suárez-Figueroa, Asuncion Gomez-Perez, and Mariano Fernández-Lopez. 2012. The neon methodology for ontology engineering. In Ontology Engineering in a Networked World. Springer, Berlin, 9--34.Google Scholar
- Matt Taddy. 2015. Document classification by inversion of distributed language representations. Arxiv Preprint ArXiv:1504.07295.Google Scholar
- Samir Tartir, I. Budak Arpinar, Michael Moore, Amit P. Sheth, and Boanerges Aleman-Meza. 2005. OntoQA: Metric-based ontology quality analysis. In Proceedings of the Fifth IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (ICDM’05) Workshop on Knowledge Acquisition from Distributed, Autonomous, Semantically Heterogeneous Data and Knowledge Sources. https://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/knoesis/660.Google Scholar
- Samir Tartir, I. Budak Arpinar, and Amit P. Sheth. 2010. Ontological evaluation and validation. In Theory and Applications of Ontology (TAO), Volume II: Ontology: The Information-Science Stance, R. Poli (Ed.). Springer.Google Scholar
- Olga Tatarintseva, Vadim Ermolayev, Brita Keller, and Wolf-Ekkehard Matzke. 2013. Quantifying ontology fitness in OntoElect using saturation- and vote-based metrics. In International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies in Education, Research, and Industrial Applications. Springer, 136--162.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bernhard Thalheim. 2013. Entity-Relationship Modeling: Foundations of Database Technology. Springer Science 8 Business Media. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Andreas Tolk and James A. Muguira. 2003. The levels of conceptual interoperability model. In Proceedings of the 2003 Fall Simulation Interoperability Workshop. 7.Google Scholar
- Mark Underwood, Michael Grüninger, Ken Baclawski, Mike Bennett, Gary Berg-Cross, Torsten Hahmann, Leo Obrst, and Ram Sriram. 2015 Internet of Things: Toward smart networked systems and societies. In Ontology Summit 2015. Retrieved from http://ontolog.cim3.net/OntologySummit/2015/.Google Scholar
- Pierre-Yves Vandenbussche, Ghislain A. Atemezing, María Poveda-Villalón, and Bernard Vatant. 2017. Linked open vocabularies LOV: A gateway to reusable semantic vocabularies on the Web. Semantic Web 8, 3 (2017), 437--452.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Johanna Völker, Denny Vrandecic, York Sure, and Andreas Hotho. 2008. AEON--An approach to the automatic evaluation of ontologies. Applied Ontology 3, 1--2 (2008), 41--62. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Denny Vrandečić. 2009. Ontology evaluation. In Handbook on Ontologies. 293--313.Google Scholar
- W3C-SWBPD. 2004. Semantic Web Best Practices and Deployment Working Group. Retrieved from http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/.Google Scholar
- Wang Ye, Zhi Zhou, Shan Jin, Debin Liu, and Mi Lu. 2017. Comparisons and selections of features and classifiers for short text classification. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering 261, 1 (2017), 012018.Google Scholar
- Ron Weber. 2002. Ontological issues in accounting information systems. In Researching Accounting as an Information Systems Discipline, Sutton S, Arnold V, Eds. American Accounting Association, Sarosota, FL.Google Scholar
- Stuart Weibel, John Kunze, Carl Lagoze, and Misha Wolf. 1998. Dublin core metadata for resource discovery. No. RFC 2413. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Patricia L. Whetzel, Natalya F. Noy, Nigam H. Shah, Paul R. Alexander, Csongor Nyulas, Tania Tudorache, and Mark A. Musen. 2011. BioPortal: Enhanced functionality via new web services from the national center for biomedical ontology to access and use ontologies in software applications. Nucleic Acids Research 39, suppl_2 (2011), 541--545.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Alexander Willner, Chrysa Papagianni, Mary Giatili, Paola Grosso, Mohamed Morsey, Yahya Al-Hazmi, and Ilya Baldin. 2015. The open-multinet upper ontology towards the semantic-based management of federated infrastructures. EAI Endorsed Transactions on Scalable Information Systems 2, 7 (2015), 1--10.Google Scholar
- Zhe Yang, Dalu Zhang, and Chuan Ye. 2006. Evaluation metrics for ontology complexity and evolution analysis. In e-Business Engineering (ICEBE '06). IEEE, 162--170. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Haining Yao, Anthony M. Orme, and Letha Etzkorn. 2005. Cohesion metrics for ontology design and application. Journal of Computer Science 1, 1 (2005), 107--113.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Wen Yao, Chao Chu, Akhil Kumar, and Zang Li. 2009. Using ontology to support context awareness in healthcare. In Proceedings of the 19th Workshop on Information Technologies and Systems.Google Scholar
- Jonathan Yu, James A. Thom, and Audrey Tam. 2009. Requirements-oriented methodology for evaluating ontologies. Information Systems. 34, 8 (2009), 766--791. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Songmao Zhang and Olivier Bodenreider. 2006. Law and order: Assessing and enforcing compliance with ontological modeling principles in the foundational model of anatomy. Computers in Biology and Medicine 36, 7--8 (2006), 67-4-693.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hongyu Zhang, Yuan-Fang Li, and Hee Beng Kuan Tan. 2010. Measuring design complexity of semantic web ontologies. Journal of Systems and Software 83, 5 (2010), 803--814. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ying Zhao and George Karypis. 2002. Comparison of Agglomerative and Partitional Document Clustering Algorithms. Technical Report TR-02-014. Minnesota Univ. Minneapolis Dept. of Computer Science.Google Scholar
- Hang Zhou, Yang Yang, and Hong-Bin Shen. 2017. Hum-mPLoc 3.0: Prediction enhancement of human protein subcellular localization through modeling the hidden correlations of gene ontology and functional domain features. Bioinformatics 33, 6 (2017), 843--853.Google Scholar
- Pawel Ziemba, Jarosław Jankowski, Jarosław Wątróbski, and Jarosław Becker. 2015. Knowledge management in website quality evaluation domain. In Computational Collective Intelligence. Springer, 75--85.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Evaluating Domain Ontologies: Clarification, Classification, and Challenges
Recommendations
Tutorial on ontological engineering Part 2: Ontology development, tools and languages
AbstractPractical aspects of ontological engineering are discussed in this part. First topic is the methodology of ontology development. Next, ontology representation languages and support tools are discussed as well as ontology alignment and merging ...
CreaDO -- A Methodology to Create Domain Ontologies Using Parameter-Based Ontology Merging Techniques
MICAI '11: Proceedings of the 2011 10th Mexican International Conference on Artificial IntelligenceNowadays, ontologies have become a key mechanism to represent the knowledge of a specific domain. Domain ontologies can be used for different purposes, one of them is the development of semantic search engines that obtain precise results by considering ...
Desiderata for domain reference ontologies in biomedicine
Special issue: Biomedical ontologiesDomain reference ontologies represent knowledge about a particular part of the world in a way that is independent from specific objectives, through a theory of the domain. An example of reference ontology in biomedical informatics is the Foundational ...
Comments