Skip to main content

2016 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

Ontology Evaluation Approaches: A Case Study from Agriculture Domain

verfasst von : Anusha Indika Walisadeera, Athula Ginige, Gihan Nilendra Wikramanayake

Erschienen in: Computational Science and Its Applications -- ICCSA 2016

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

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

search-config
loading …

Abstract

The quality of an ontology very much depends on its validity. Therefore, ontology validation and evaluation is very important task. However, according to the current literature, there is no agreed method or approach to evaluate an ontology. The choice of a suitable approach very much depends on the purpose of validation or evaluation, the application in which the ontology is to be used, and on what aspect of the ontology we are trying to validate or evaluate. We have developed large user centered ontology to represent agricultural information and relevant knowledge in user context for Sri Lankan farmers. In this paper, we described the validation and evaluation procedures we applied to verify the content and examine the applicability of the developed ontology. We obtained expert suggestions and assessments for the criteria used to develop the ontology as well as to obtain user feedback especially from the farmers to measure the ontological commitment. Delphi Method, Modified Delphi Method and OOPS! Web-based tool were used to validate the ontology in terms of accuracy and quality. The implemented ontology is evaluated internally and externally to identify the deficiencies of the artifact in use. An online knowledge base with a SPARQL endpoint was created to share and reuse the domain knowledge. It was also made use of for the evaluation process. A mobile-based application is developed to check user satisfaction on the knowledge provided by the ontology. Since there is no single best or preferred method for ontology evaluation we reviewed various approaches used to evaluate the ontology and finally identified classification for ontology evaluation approaches based on our work.

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!

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!

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!

Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Gangemi, A., Catenacci, C., Ciaramita, M., Lehmann, J.: Modelling ontology evaluation and validation. In: Sure, Y., Domingue, J. (eds.) ESWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4011, pp. 140–154. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRef Gangemi, A., Catenacci, C., Ciaramita, M., Lehmann, J.: Modelling ontology evaluation and validation. In: Sure, Y., Domingue, J. (eds.) ESWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4011, pp. 140–154. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Gozde, B., Dikmen, I., Birgonul, M.T.: Ontology evaluation: an example of delay analysis. Procedia Eng. 85, 61–68 (2014)CrossRef Gozde, B., Dikmen, I., Birgonul, M.T.: Ontology evaluation: an example of delay analysis. Procedia Eng. 85, 61–68 (2014)CrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Tartir, S., Arpinar, I.B., Sheth, A.P.: Ontological evaluation and validation. In: Poli, R., Healy, M., Kameas, A. (eds.) Theory and Applications of Ontology: Computer Applications, pp. 115–130. Springer, Netherlands (2010)CrossRef Tartir, S., Arpinar, I.B., Sheth, A.P.: Ontological evaluation and validation. In: Poli, R., Healy, M., Kameas, A. (eds.) Theory and Applications of Ontology: Computer Applications, pp. 115–130. Springer, Netherlands (2010)CrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Holsapple, C.W., Joshi, K.D.: A collaborative approach to ontology design. Commun. ACM 45(2), 42–47 (2002)CrossRef Holsapple, C.W., Joshi, K.D.: A collaborative approach to ontology design. Commun. ACM 45(2), 42–47 (2002)CrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Walisadeera, A.I., Ginige, A., Wikramanayake, G.N.: User centered ontology for Sri Lankan farmers. Ecol. Inf. 26(2), 140–150 (2015)CrossRef Walisadeera, A.I., Ginige, A., Wikramanayake, G.N.: User centered ontology for Sri Lankan farmers. Ecol. Inf. 26(2), 140–150 (2015)CrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Brank, J., Grobelnik, M., Mladenić, D.: A survey of ontology evaluation techniques. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Data Mining and Data Warehouses (2005) Brank, J., Grobelnik, M., Mladenić, D.: A survey of ontology evaluation techniques. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Data Mining and Data Warehouses (2005)
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Obrst, L., Ceusters, W., Mani, I., Ray, S., Smith, B.: The evaluation of ontologies. In: Baker, C.J.O., Cheung, K. (eds.) Revolutionizing Knowledge Discovery in the Life Sciences, pp. 139–158. Springer, USA (2007) Obrst, L., Ceusters, W., Mani, I., Ray, S., Smith, B.: The evaluation of ontologies. In: Baker, C.J.O., Cheung, K. (eds.) Revolutionizing Knowledge Discovery in the Life Sciences, pp. 139–158. Springer, USA (2007)
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Guarino, N., Welty, C.: Evaluating ontological decisions with OntoClean. Commun. ACM 45(2), 61–65 (2002)CrossRef Guarino, N., Welty, C.: Evaluating ontological decisions with OntoClean. Commun. ACM 45(2), 61–65 (2002)CrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Gómez-Pérez, A.: Ontology evaluation. In: Staab, S., et al. (eds.) Handbook on Ontologies, Part II, pp. 251–274. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg (2004)CrossRef Gómez-Pérez, A.: Ontology evaluation. In: Staab, S., et al. (eds.) Handbook on Ontologies, Part II, pp. 251–274. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg (2004)CrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Hsu, C.-C., Sandford, B.A.: The Delphi technique: making sense of consensus. Pract. Assess. Res. Eval. 12(10), 8 (2007) Hsu, C.-C., Sandford, B.A.: The Delphi technique: making sense of consensus. Pract. Assess. Res. Eval. 12(10), 8 (2007)
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Poveda-Villalón, M., Suárez-Figueroa, M.C., Gómez-Pérez, A.: Validating ontologies with OOPS! In: ten Teije, A., et al. (eds.) EKAW 2012. LNCS, vol. 7603, pp. 267–281. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRef Poveda-Villalón, M., Suárez-Figueroa, M.C., Gómez-Pérez, A.: Validating ontologies with OOPS! In: ten Teije, A., et al. (eds.) EKAW 2012. LNCS, vol. 7603, pp. 267–281. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Poveda, M., Suárez-Figueroa, M.C., Gómez-Pérez, A.: Common pitfalls in ontology development. In: Meseguer, P., Mandow, L., Gasca, R.M. (eds.) CAEPIA 2009. LNCS, vol. 5988, pp. 91–100. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRef Poveda, M., Suárez-Figueroa, M.C., Gómez-Pérez, A.: Common pitfalls in ontology development. In: Meseguer, P., Mandow, L., Gasca, R.M. (eds.) CAEPIA 2009. LNCS, vol. 5988, pp. 91–100. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat De Silva, L.N., Goonetillake, J.S., Wikramanayake, G.N., Ginige, A.: Farmer response towards the initial agriculture information dissemination mobile prototype. In: Murgante, B., et al. (eds.) ICCSA 2013, Part I. LNCS, vol. 7971, pp. 264–278. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRef De Silva, L.N., Goonetillake, J.S., Wikramanayake, G.N., Ginige, A.: Farmer response towards the initial agriculture information dissemination mobile prototype. In: Murgante, B., et al. (eds.) ICCSA 2013, Part I. LNCS, vol. 7971, pp. 264–278. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRef
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Klyne, G., Carroll, J.J.: Resource Description Framework (RDF): concepts and abstract syntax. world wide web consortium (2004) Klyne, G., Carroll, J.J.: Resource Description Framework (RDF): concepts and abstract syntax. world wide web consortium (2004)
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Walisadeera, A.I., Ginige, A., Wikramanayake, G.N., Pamuditha Madushanka, A.L., Shanika Udeshini, A.A.: A framework for end-to-end ontology management system. In: Gervasi, O., et al. (eds.) ICCSA 2015. LNCS, vol. 9155, pp. 529–544. Springer, Heidelberg (2015)CrossRef Walisadeera, A.I., Ginige, A., Wikramanayake, G.N., Pamuditha Madushanka, A.L., Shanika Udeshini, A.A.: A framework for end-to-end ontology management system. In: Gervasi, O., et al. (eds.) ICCSA 2015. LNCS, vol. 9155, pp. 529–544. Springer, Heidelberg (2015)CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Ontology Evaluation Approaches: A Case Study from Agriculture Domain
verfasst von
Anusha Indika Walisadeera
Athula Ginige
Gihan Nilendra Wikramanayake
Copyright-Jahr
2016
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-42089-9_23

Premium Partner