Conceptual knowledge processing with formal concept analysis and ontologies

Among many other knowledge representations formalisms, Ontologies and Formal Concept Analysis (FCA) aim at modeling ‘concepts’. We discuss how these two formalisms may complement another from an application point of view. In particular, we will see how FCA can be used to support Ontology Engineering, and how ontologies can be exploited in FCA applications. The interplay of FCA and ontologies is studied along the life cycle of an ontology: (i) FCA can support the building of the ontology as a learning technique. (ii) The established ontology can be analyzed and navigated by using techniques of FCA. (iii) Last but not least, the ontology may be used to improve an FCA application.

Semantic network analysis of ontologies

A key argument for modeling knowledge in ontologies is the easy re-use and re-engineering of the knowledge. However, beside consistency checking, current ontology engineering tools provide only basic functionalities for analyzing ontologies. Since ontologies can be considered as (labeled, directed) graphs, graph analysis techniques are a suitable answer for this need. Graph analysis has been performed by sociologists for over 60 years, and resulted in the vivid research area of Social Network Analysis (SNA). While social network structures in general currently receive high attention in the Semantic Web community, there are only very few SNA applications up to now, and virtually none for analyzing the structure of ontologies. We illustrate in this paper the benefits of applying SNA to ontologies and the Semantic Web, and discuss which research topics arise on the edge between the two areas. In particular, we discuss how different notions of centrality describe the core content and structure of an ontology. From the rather simple notion of degree centrality over betweenness centrality to the more complex eigenvector centrality based on Hermitian matrices, we illustrate the insights these measures provide on two ontologies, which are different in purpose, scope, and size.

Hierarchies of conceptual scales

Formal Concept Analysis allows to derive conceptual hierarchies from data tables. Formal Concept Analysis is applied in various domains, e.g., data analysis, information retrieval, and knowledge discovery in databases. In order to deal with increasing sizes of the data tables (and to allow more complex data structures than just binary attributes), conceputal scales habe been developed. They are considered as metadata which structure the data conceptually. But in large applications, the number of conceptual scales increases as well. Techniques are needed which support the navigation of the user also on this meta-level of conceptual scales. In this paper, we attack this problem by extending the set of scales by hierarchically ordered higher level scales and by introducing a visualization technique called nested scaling. We extend the two-level architecture of Formal Concept Analysis (the data table plus one level of conceptual scales) to many-level architecture with a cascading system of conceptual scales. The approach also allows to use representation techniques of Formal Concept Analysis for the visualization of thesauri and ontologies.

Creation and merging of ontology top-levels

We provide a new method for systematically structuring the top-down level of ontologies. It is based on an interactive, top-down knowledge acquisition process, which assures that the knowledge engineer considers all possible cases while avoiding redundant acquisition. The method is suited especially for creating/merging the top part(s) of the ontologies, where high accuracy is required, and for supporting the merging of two (or more) ontologies on that level.

Off to new shores

In the last years, the main orientation of Formal Concept Analysis (FCA) has turned from mathematics towards computer science. This article provides a review of this new orientation and analyzes why and how FCA and computer science attracted each other. It discusses FCA as a knowledge representation formalism using five knowledge representation principles provided by Davis, Shrobe, and Szolovits [DSS93]. It then studies how and why mathematics-based researchers got attracted by computer science. We will argue for continuing this trend by integrating the two research areas FCA and Ontology Engineering. The second part of the article discusses three lines of research which witness the new orientation of Formal Concept Analysis: FCA as a conceptual clustering technique and its application for supporting the merging of ontologies; the efficient computation of association rules and the structuring of the results; and the visualization and management of conceptual hierarchies and ontologies including its application in an email management system.

Ontology merging with formal concept analysis

Ontologies have been established for knowledge sharing and are widely used as a means for conceptually structuring domains of interest. With the growing usage of ontologies, the problem of overlapping knowledge in a common domain becomes critical. In this short paper, we address two methods for merging ontologies based on Formal Concept Analysis: FCA-Merge and ONTEX. --- FCA-Merge is a method for merging ontologies following a bottom-up approach which offers a structural description of the merging process. The method is guided by application-specific instances of the given source ontologies. We apply techniques from natural language processing and formal concept analysis to derive a lattice of concepts as a structural result of FCA-Merge. The generated result is then explored and transformed into the merged ontology with human interaction. --- ONTEX is a method for systematically structuring the top-down level of ontologies. It is based on an interactive, top-down- knowledge acquisition process, which assures that the knowledge engineer considers all possible cases while avoiding redundant acquisition. The method is suited especially for creating/merging the top part(s) of the ontologies, where high accuracy is required, and for supporting the merging of two (or more) ontologies on that level.

Capturing Emergent Semantics from Social Annotation Systems

The ongoing growth of the World Wide Web, catalyzed by the increasing possibility of ubiquitous access via a variety of devices, continues to strengthen its role as our prevalent information and commmunication medium. However, although tools like search engines facilitate retrieval, the task of finally making sense of Web content is still often left to human interpretation. The vision of supporting both humans and machines in such knowledge-based activities led to the development of different systems which allow to structure Web resources by metadata annotations. Interestingly, two major approaches which gained a considerable amount of attention are addressing the problem from nearly opposite directions: On the one hand, the idea of the Semantic Web suggests to formalize the knowledge within a particular domain by means of the "top-down" approach of defining ontologies. On the other hand, Social Annotation Systems as part of the so-called Web 2.0 movement implement a "bottom-up" style of categorization using arbitrary keywords. Experience as well as research in the characteristics of both systems has shown that their strengths and weaknesses seem to be inverse: While Social Annotation suffers from problems like, e. g., ambiguity or lack or precision, ontologies were especially designed to eliminate those. On the contrary, the latter suffer from a knowledge acquisition bottleneck, which is successfully overcome by the large user populations of Social Annotation Systems. Instead of being regarded as competing paradigms, the obvious potential synergies from a combination of both motivated approaches to "bridge the gap" between them. These were fostered by the evidence of emergent semantics, i. e., the self-organized evolution of implicit conceptual structures, within Social Annotation data. While several techniques to exploit the emergent patterns were proposed, a systematic analysis - especially regarding paradigms from the field of ontology learning - is still largely missing. This also includes a deeper understanding of the circumstances which affect the evolution processes. This work aims to address this gap by providing an in-depth study of methods and influencing factors to capture emergent semantics from Social Annotation Systems. We focus hereby on the acquisition of lexical semantics from the underlying networks of keywords, users and resources. Structured along different ontology learning tasks, we use a methodology of semantic grounding to characterize and evaluate the semantic relations captured by different methods. In all cases, our studies are based on datasets from several Social Annotation Systems. Specifically, we first analyze semantic relatedness among keywords, and identify measures which detect different notions of relatedness. These constitute the input of concept learning algorithms, which focus then on the discovery of synonymous and ambiguous keywords. Hereby, we assess the usefulness of various clustering techniques. As a prerequisite to induce hierarchical relationships, our next step is to study measures which quantify the level of generality of a particular keyword. We find that comparatively simple measures can approximate the generality information encoded in reference taxonomies. These insights are used to inform the final task, namely the creation of concept hierarchies. For this purpose, generality-based algorithms exhibit advantages compared to clustering approaches. In order to complement the identification of suitable methods to capture semantic structures, we analyze as a next step several factors which influence their emergence. Empirical evidence is provided that the amount of available data plays a crucial role for determining keyword meanings. From a different perspective, we examine pragmatic aspects by considering different annotation patterns among users. Based on a broad distinction between "categorizers" and "describers", we find that the latter produce more accurate results. This suggests a causal link between pragmatic and semantic aspects of keyword annotation. As a special kind of usage pattern, we then have a look at system abuse and spam. While observing a mixed picture, we suggest that an individual decision should be taken instead of disregarding spammers as a matter of principle. Finally, we discuss a set of applications which operationalize the results of our studies for enhancing both Social Annotation and semantic systems. These comprise on the one hand tools which foster the emergence of semantics, and on the one hand applications which exploit the socially induced relations to improve, e. g., searching, browsing, or user profiling facilities. In summary, the contributions of this work highlight viable methods and crucial aspects for designing enhanced knowledge-based services of a Social Semantic Web.