Essentials in Ontology Engineering: Methodologies, Languages, and Tools

In the beginning of the 90s, ontology development was similar to an art: ontology developers did not have clear guidelines on how to build ontologies but only some design criteria to be followed. Work on principles, methods and methodologies, together with supporting technologies and languages, made ontology development become an engineering discipline, the so-called Ontology Engineering. Ontology Engineering refers to the set of activities that concern the ontology development process and the ontology life cycle, the methods and methodologies for building ontologies, and the tool suites and languages that support them. Thanks to the work done in the Ontology Engineering field, the development of ontologies within and between teams has increased and improved, as well as the possibility of reusing ontologies in other developments and in final applications. Currently, ontologies are widely used in (a) Knowledge Engineering, Artificial Intelligence and Computer Science, (b) applications related to knowledge management, natural language processing, e-commerce, intelligent information integration, information retrieval, database design and integration, bio-informatics, education, and (c) the Semantic Web, the Semantic Grid, and the Linked Data initiative. In this paper, we provide an overview of Ontology Engineering, mentioning the most outstanding and used methodologies, languages, and tools for building ontologies. In addition, we include some words on how all these elements can be used in the Linked Data initiative.

Combining data mining and ontology engineering to enrich ontologies and linked data

In this position paper, we claim that the need for time consuming data preparation and result interpretation tasks in knowledge discovery, as well as for costly expert consultation and consensus building activities required for ontology building can be reduced through exploiting the interplay of data mining and ontology engineering. The aim is to obtain in a semi-automatic way new knowledge from distributed data sources that can be used for inference and reasoning, as well as to guide the extraction of further knowledge from these data sources. The proposed approach is based on the creation of a novel knowledge discovery method relying on the combination, through an iterative ?feedbackloop?, of (a) data mining techniques to make emerge implicit models from data and (b) pattern-based ontology engineering to capture these models in reusable, conceptual and inferable artefacts.

Introduction: Ontology Engineering in a Networked World

While ontology engineering is rapidly entering the mainstream, expert ontology engineers are a scarce resource. Hence, there is a need for practical methodologies and technologies, which can assist a variety of user types with ontology development tasks. To address this need, this book presents a scenario-based methodology, the NeOn Methodology, which provides guidance for all main activities in ontology engineering. The context in which we consider these activities is that of a networked world, where reuse of existing resources is commonplace, ontologies are developed collaboratively, and managing relationships between ontologies becomes an essential aspect of the ontological engineering process. The description of both the methodology and the ontology engineering activities is grounded in a comprehensive software environment, the NeOn Toolkit and its plugins, which provides integrated support for all the activities described in the book. Here we provide an introduction for the whole book, while the rest of the content is organized into 4 parts: (1) the NeOn Methodology Framework, (2) the set of ontology engineering activities, (3) the NeOn Toolkit and plugins, and (4) three use cases. Primary goals of this book are (a) to disseminate the results from the NeOn project in a structured and comprehensive form, (b) to make it easier for students and practitioners to adopt ontology engineering methods and tools, and (c) to provide a textbook for undergraduate and postgraduate courses on ontology engineering.

Scheduling Ontology Engineering Projects Using gOntt

In order to manage properly ontology development projects in complex settings and to apply correctly the NeOn Methodology, it is crucial to have knowledge of the entire ontology development life cycle before starting the development projects. The ontology project plan and scheduling helps the ontology development team to have this knowledge and to monitor the project execution. To facilitate the planning and scheduling of ontology development projects, the NeOn Toolkit plugin called gOntt has been developed. gOntt is a tool that supports the scheduling of ontology network development projects and helps to execute them. In addition, prescriptive methodological guidelines for scheduling ontology development projects using gOntt are provided.

The NeOn Methodology for Ontology Engineering

In contrast to other approaches that provide methodological guidance for ontology engineering, the NeOn Methodology does not prescribe a rigid workflow, but instead it suggests a variety of pathways for developing ontologies. The nine scenarios proposed in the methodology cover commonly occurring situations, for example, when available ontologies need to be re-engineered, aligned, modularized, localized to support different languages and cultures, and integrated with ontology design patterns and non-ontological resources, such as folksonomies or thesauri. In addition, the NeOn Methodology framework provides (a) a glossary of processes and activities involved in the development of ontologies, (b) two ontology life cycle models, and (c) a set of methodological guidelines for different processes and activities, which are described (a) functionally, in terms of goals, inputs, outputs, and relevant constraints; (b) procedurally, by means of workflow specifications; and (c) empirically, through a set of illustrative examples.

Supporting requirement elicitation and ontology testing in knowledge graph engineering

Knowledge graphs and ontologies are closely related concepts in the field of knowledge representation. In recent years, knowledge graphs have gained increasing popularity and are serving as essential components in many knowledge engineering projects that view them as crucial to their success. The conceptual foundation of the knowledge graph is provided by ontologies. Ontology modeling is an iterative engineering process that consists of steps such as the elicitation and formalization of requirements, the development, testing, refactoring, and release of the ontology. The testing of the ontology is a crucial and occasionally overlooked step of the process due to the lack of integrated tools to support it. As a result of this gap in the state-of-the-art, the testing of the ontology is completed manually, which requires a considerable amount of time and effort from the ontology engineers. The lack of tool support is noticed in the requirement elicitation process as well. In this aspect, the rise in the adoption and accessibility of knowledge graphs allows for the development and use of automated tools to assist with the elicitation of requirements from such a complementary source of data. Therefore, this doctoral research is focused on developing methods and tools that support the requirement elicitation and testing steps of an ontology engineering process. To support the testing of the ontology, we have developed XDTesting, a web application that is integrated with the GitHub platform that serves as an ontology testing manager. Concurrently, to support the elicitation and documentation of competency questions, we have defined and implemented RevOnt, a method to extract competency questions from knowledge graphs. Both methods are evaluated through their implementation and the results are promising.

Terminology and knowledge engineering conference. New frontiers in the constructive symbiosis of terminology and knowledge engineering

To meet the increasing demands of the complex inter-organizational processes and the demand for continuous innovation and internationalization, it is evident that new forms of organisation are being adopted, fostering more intensive collaboration processes and sharing of resources, in what can be called collaborative networks (Camarinha-Matos, 2006:03). Information and knowledge are crucial resources in collaborative networks, being their management fundamental processes to optimize. Knowledge organisation and collaboration systems are thus important instruments for the success of collaborative networks of organisations having been researched in the last decade in the areas of computer science, information science, management sciences, terminology and linguistics. Nevertheless, research in this area didn’t give much attention to multilingual contexts of collaboration, which pose specific and challenging problems. It is then clear that access to and representation of knowledge will happen more and more on a multilingual setting which implies the overcoming of difficulties inherent to the presence of multiple languages, through the use of processes like localization of ontologies. Although localization, like other processes that involve multilingualism, is a rather well-developed practice and its methodologies and tools fruitfully employed by the language industry in the development and adaptation of multilingual content, it has not yet been sufficiently explored as an element of support to the development of knowledge representations - in particular ontologies - expressed in more than one language. Multilingual knowledge representation is then an open research area calling for cross-contributions from knowledge engineering, terminology, ontology engineering, cognitive sciences, computational linguistics, natural language processing, and management sciences. This workshop joined researchers interested in multilingual knowledge representation, in a multidisciplinary environment to debate the possibilities of cross-fertilization between knowledge engineering, terminology, ontology engineering, cognitive sciences, computational linguistics, natural language processing, and management sciences applied to contexts where multilingualism continuously creates new and demanding challenges to current knowledge representation methods and techniques. In this workshop six papers dealing with different approaches to multilingual knowledge representation are presented, most of them describing tools, approaches and results obtained in the development of ongoing projects. In the first case, Andrés Domínguez Burgos, Koen Kerremansa and Rita Temmerman present a software module that is part of a workbench for terminological and ontological mining, Termontospider, a wiki crawler that aims at optimally traverse Wikipedia in search of domainspecific texts for extracting terminological and ontological information. The crawler is part of a tool suite for automatically developing multilingual termontological databases, i.e. ontologicallyunderpinned multilingual terminological databases. In this paper the authors describe the basic principles behind the crawler and summarized the research setting in which the tool is currently tested. In the second paper, Fumiko Kano presents a work comparing four feature-based similarity measures derived from cognitive sciences. The purpose of the comparative analysis presented by the author is to verify the potentially most effective model that can be applied for mapping independent ontologies in a culturally influenced domain. For that, datasets based on standardized pre-defined feature dimensions and values, which are obtainable from the UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) have been used for the comparative analysis of the similarity measures. The purpose of the comparison is to verify the similarity measures based on the objectively developed datasets. According to the author the results demonstrate that the Bayesian Model of Generalization provides for the most effective cognitive model for identifying the most similar corresponding concepts existing for a targeted socio-cultural community. In another presentation, Thierry Declerck, Hans-Ulrich Krieger and Dagmar Gromann present an ongoing work and propose an approach to automatic extraction of information from multilingual financial Web resources, to provide candidate terms for building ontology elements or instances of ontology concepts. The authors present a complementary approach to the direct localization/translation of ontology labels, by acquiring terminologies through the access and harvesting of multilingual Web presences of structured information providers in the field of finance, leading to both the detection of candidate terms in various multilingual sources in the financial domain that can be used not only as labels of ontology classes and properties but also for the possible generation of (multilingual) domain ontologies themselves. In the next paper, Manuel Silva, António Lucas Soares and Rute Costa claim that despite the availability of tools, resources and techniques aimed at the construction of ontological artifacts, developing a shared conceptualization of a given reality still raises questions about the principles and methods that support the initial phases of conceptualization. These questions become, according to the authors, more complex when the conceptualization occurs in a multilingual setting. To tackle these issues the authors present a collaborative platform – conceptME - where terminological and knowledge representation processes support domain experts throughout a conceptualization framework, allowing the inclusion of multilingual data as a way to promote knowledge sharing and enhance conceptualization and support a multilingual ontology specification. In another presentation Frieda Steurs and Hendrik J. Kockaert present us TermWise, a large project dealing with legal terminology and phraseology for the Belgian public services, i.e. the translation office of the ministry of justice, a project which aims at developing an advanced tool including expert knowledge in the algorithms that extract specialized language from textual data (legal documents) and whose outcome is a knowledge database including Dutch/French equivalents for legal concepts, enriched with the phraseology related to the terms under discussion. Finally, Deborah Grbac, Luca Losito, Andrea Sada and Paolo Sirito report on the preliminary results of a pilot project currently ongoing at UCSC Central Library, where they propose to adapt to subject librarians, employed in large and multilingual Academic Institutions, the model used by translators working within European Union Institutions. The authors are using User Experience (UX) Analysis in order to provide subject librarians with a visual support, by means of “ontology tables” depicting conceptual linking and connections of words with concepts presented according to their semantic and linguistic meaning. The organizers hope that the selection of papers presented here will be of interest to a broad audience, and will be a starting point for further discussion and cooperation.

Conservation GIS: Ontology and spatial reasoning for commonsense knowledge.

Dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Geospatial Technologies.

Engineering Temporal and Spatial Aspects in OWL using Patterns

WWW is a huge, open, heterogeneous system, however its contents data is mainly human oriented. The Semantic Web needs to assure that data is readable and “understandable” to intelligent software agents, though the use of explicit and formal semantics. Ontologies constitute a privileged artifact for capturing the semantic of the WWW data. Temporal and spatial dimensions are transversal to the generality of knowledge domains and therefore are fundamental for the reasoning process of software agents. Representing temporal/spatial evolution of concepts and their relations in OWL (W3C standard for ontologies) it is not straightforward. Although proposed several strategies to tackle this problem but there is still no formal and standard approach. This work main goal consists of development of methods/tools to support the engineering of temporal and spatial aspects in intelligent systems through the use of OWL ontologies. An existing method for ontology engineering, Fonte was used as framework for the development of this work. As main contributions of this work Fonte was re-engineered in order to: i) support the spatial dimension; ii) work with OWL Ontologies; iii) and support the application of Ontology Design Patterns. Finally, the capabilities of the proposed approach were demonstrated by engineering time and space in a demo ontology about football.

Ontology alignment

Introduction to alignment, mapping,

An architecture for scaling ontology networks

Constructing ontology networks typically occurs at design time at the hands of knowledge engineers who assemble their components statically. There are, however, use cases where ontology networks need to be assembled upon request and processed at runtime, without altering the stored ontologies and without tampering with one another. These are what we call "virtual [ontology] networks", and keeping track of how an ontology changes in each virtual network is called "multiplexing". Issues may arise from the connectivity of ontology networks. In many cases, simple flat import schemes will not work, because many ontology managers can cause property assertions to be erroneously interpreted as annotations and ignored by reasoners. Also, multiple virtual networks should optimize their cumulative memory footprint, and where they cannot, this should occur for very limited periods of time. We claim that these problems should be handled by the software that serves these ontology networks, rather than by ontology engineering methodologies. We propose a method that spreads multiple virtual networks across a 3-tier structure, and can reduce the amount of erroneously interpreted axioms, under certain raw statement distributions across the ontologies. We assumed OWL as the core language handled by semantic applications in the framework at hand, due to the greater availability of reasoners and rule engines. We also verified that, in common OWL ontology management software, OWL axiom interpretation occurs in the worst case scenario of pre-order visit. To measure the effectiveness and space-efficiency of our solution, a Java and RESTful implementation was produced within an Apache project. We verified that a 3-tier structure can accommodate reasonably complex ontology networks better, in terms of the expressivity OWL axiom interpretation, than flat-tree import schemes can. We measured both the memory overhead of the additional components we put on top of traditional ontology networks, and the framework's caching capabilities.