Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Related Work
Research Questions
Hypotheses
References
All Topics
Computer Science
Information Systems

Ontology evolution for end-user communities

Profile image of Peter W EklundPeter W Eklund

2013, International Semantic Web Conference

Abstract

This project supports application for a practice-based [4] PhD by Peter Goodall. The project will produce a system architecture and proof-of-concept laboratory implementation to model, instrument, prototype, and evaluate the effectiveness of several alternate system designs which are intended to enable small end-user communities to evolve specialized ontologies and annotations for entities important to them. Depending on available resources, the laboratory may also be used to study bridging-subset ontologies for interchange, federation and seeding of community ontologies. There will be a discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of various approaches tried by others, and a reflection on the usefulness of the system resulting from innovative work of this project.

Related papers

Community-Driven Ontology Management: DERI Case Study
Dieter Fensel

The 2005 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence (WI'05), 2005

We introduce the concept of community-driven ontology management and demonstrate the added value to conventional ontology management of being community-driven.

View PDFchevron_right
A case study in supporting DIstributed, Loosely-controlled and evolvInG Engineering of oNTologies (DILIGENT
SoFía PinTó

Journal of Universal Computer Science, 2004

Knowledge management solutions relying on central repositories sometimes have not met expectations, since users often create knowledge ad-hoc using their individual vocabulary and using their own decentral IT infrastructure (e.g., their laptop). To improve knowledge management for such decentralized and individualized knowledge work, it is necessary to, first, provide a corresponding IT infrastructure and to, second, deal with the harmonization of different vocabularies/ontologies. In this paper, we briefly sketch the technical peer-to-peer platform that we have built, but then we focus on the harmonization of the participating ontologies.

View PDFchevron_right
Ontology engineering and evolution in a distributed world using DILIGENT
Sofia Pinto

2009

Existing mature ontology engineering approaches are based on some basic assumptions that are often neglected in practice. Ontologies often need to be built in a decentralized way, ontologies must be given to a community in a way such that individuals have partial autonomy over them, ontologies have a life cycle that involves an iteration back and forth between construction/modification and use and ontologies should support the participation of non-expert users in ontology engineering processes.

View PDFchevron_right
Supporting Evolving Ontologies on the Internet
Michel Klein

Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2002

The idea of a "Semantic Web" has created a lot of interest in the use of ontologies-formal descriptions of a part of the world-for describing the meaning of information on the web. However, when ontologies are used on the web, several problems appear: how can different ontologies be combined, what happens when they are changed, and how should they be adapted for new tasks. Those questions require the management of ontologies, their use and their evolution. This paper describes a research project that will investigate the management of ontologies in an web-based setting.

View PDFchevron_right
Extending community ontology using automatically generated suggestions
Maciej Dabrowski

Proceedings of FLAIRS, 2007

View PDFchevron_right
Collaborative Ontology Development with MarcOnt Portal
Maciej Dabrowski

cs.vu.nl

View PDFchevron_right
Towards Social Performance Indicators for Community-Based Ontology Evolution
Pieter De Leenheer

ceur-ws.org

View PDFchevron_right
Semantic infrastructure to enable collaboration in ontology development
Mark Musen

2011 International Conference on Collaboration Technologies and Systems (CTS), 2011

In many scientific disciplines, and in biomedicine in particular, researchers rely on ontologies to enable them to annotate and integrate their data. These ontologies are living and constantly evolving artifacts and the ontology authors must rely on their user community to ensure that the coverage of the ontologies is sufficient for annotations and other tasks for which users deploy the ontologies.

View PDFchevron_right
OntoEdit Empowering SWAP: a Case Study In Supporting DIstributed, Loosely-Controlled and EvolvInG Engineering of ONTologies (DILIGENT)
Sofia Pinto

The Semantic Web: Research and …, 2004

View PDFchevron_right
User-driven ontology evolution management
Alexander Maedche

… : Ontologies and the …, 2002

With rising importance of knowledge interchange, many industrial and academic applications have adopted ontologies as their conceptual backbone. However, industrial and academic environments are very dynamic, thus inducing changes to application requirements. To fulfill these changes, often the underlying ontology must be evolved as well. As ontologies grow in size, the complexity of change management increases, thus requiring a wellstructured ontology evolution process. In this paper we identify a possible sixphase evolution process and focus on providing the user with capabilities to control and customize it. We introduce the concept of an evolution strategy encapsulating policy for evolution with respect to user's requirements.

View PDFchevron_right

References (22)

  1. Bergman, M.: The sweet compendium of ontology building tools (Jan 2010), http://www.mkbergman.com/862/ the-sweet-compendium-of-ontology-building-tools/
  2. Blei, D.M., Lafferty, J.D.: Dynamic topic models. In: Proceedings of the 23rd international conference on Machine learning. p. 113120 (2006), http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1143859
  3. Blei, D.M., Griffiths, T.L., Jordan, M.I., Tenenbaum, J.B.: Hierarchical topic models and the nested chinese restaurant process. In: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. p. 2003. MIT Press (2004)
  4. Candy, L.: Practice based research: A guide. CCS Report: 2006-V1. 0 November p. 19 (2006)
  5. Chandler, D.: Semiotics the Basics. Taylor & Francis, Hoboken (2007), http://public.eblib.com/EBLPublic/PublicView.do?ptiID=308502
  6. Cimiano, P., Staab, S., Tane, J.: Automatic acquisition of taxonomies from text: FCA meets NLP. In: International Workshop & Tutorial on Adaptive Text Extraction and Mining held in conjunction with the 14th European Conference on Machine Learning and the 7th European Conference on Principles and Practice of. p. 10 (2003)
  7. Cimiano, P.: Ontology Learning and Population from Text: Algorithms, Evaluation and Applications. Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., Secaucus, NJ, USA (2006)
  8. Eklund, P., Goodall, P., Wray, T.: Information retrieval and social tagging for digital libraries using formal concept analysis. In: Computing and Communication Technologies, Research, Innovation, and Vision for the Future (RIVF), 2010 IEEE RIVF International Conference on. p. 16 (2013)
  9. Eklund, P., Goodall, P., Wray, T., Bunt, B., Lawson, A., Christidis, L., Daniels, V., Van Ollfen, M.: Designing the digital ecosystem of the virtual museum of the pacific. In: 3rd IEEE International Conference on Digital Ecosystems and Technologies. IEEE Press (2009)
  10. Eklund, P., Goodall, P.J., Wray, T., Daniel, V., Van Olffen, M.: Folksonomy with practical taxonomy, a design for social metadata of the virtual museum of the pacific. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Information Technology and Applications. p. 112117 (2009)
  11. Fischer, G.: Communities of interest: Learning through the interaction of multiple knowledge systems. In: Proceedings of the 24th IRIS Conference. p. 114 (2001)
  12. Fu, W.T.: The microstructures of social tagging: a rational model. In: Proceedings of the 2008 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work. p. 229238 (2008), http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1460600
  13. Gennari, J.H., Musen, M.A., Fergerson, R.W., Grosso, W.E., Crubzy, M., Eriksson, H., Noy, N.F., Tu, S.W.: The evolution of protg: an environment for knowledge-based systems development. International Journal of Human-computer studies 58(1), 89123 (2003), http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1071581902001271
  14. Gruber, T.R., et al.: A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowledge acquisition 5, 199199 (1993)
  15. Mika, P.: Ontologies are us: A unified model of social networks and semantics. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 5(1), 5-15 (Mar 2007), http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/ B758F-4MYF67P-1/2/56984a3ddf4632bb98b722551cdb1151
  16. Nth, W.: Handbook of semiotics. Indiana University Press (1995), http: //books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=rHA4KQcPeNgC&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&dq= Handbook+of+Semiotics&ots=ddo1tWkS4f&sig=9NNalr 6O7bREpvCPhwQXB9lBn4
  17. Oxford English Dictionary: "ontology, n.". (2004), http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/131551?redirectedFrom=Ontology
  18. Rosch, E., Mervis, C., Gray, W., Johnson, D., Boyes-Braem, P.: Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive psychology 8(3), 382439 (1976)
  19. Rosch, E.: Principles of categorization. Concepts: core readings p. 189206 (1999), http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=sj1gczQ-7K8C&oi=fnd&pg= PA189&dq=%0D%0A1%0D%0APrinciples+of+Categorization%0D%0AEleanor+
  20. Rosch,+1978+&ots=NoqbGizR2u&sig=0WEAZVboo9yC0P8tnryxMC7DT3M
  21. Sanborn, A.N., Griffiths, T.L., Navarro, D.J.: A more rational model of categorization. In: Proceedings of the 28th annual conference of the cognitive science society. p. 726731 (2006), http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/ download?doi=10.1.1.163.3800&rep=rep1&type=pdf
  22. Wenger, E.: Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge University Press (Sep 1999)

Related papers

On Community-Based Ontology Evolution
Pieter De Leenheer

Manuscript, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 2008

View PDFchevron_right
The HCOME-3O framework for supporting the collaborative engineering of evolving ontologies
Konstantinos I Kotis

ESOE 2007 International …, 2007

Nowadays it is widely accepted that ontologies, the key technology for the realization of the Semantic Web, are artefacts that are collaboratively and iteratively developed/evolved, shared, evaluated and discussed within communities of knowledge workers. To enhance the potential of ontologies to be collaboratively engineered and be consistently evolved within and between different communities, they must be escorted with rich meta-information describing the conceptualisations they realize, implementation decisions, the rationale for their evolution, as well as the evolution itself. To support the collaborative engineering of ontologies within and across different communities, this paper proposes a framework of (meta-)ontologies for capturing the metainformation that is necessary for interlinking, sharing, and combining knowledge among the parties involved in such a process. The framework is being embedded in the HCOME ontology engineering methodology, and can be applied to the design and implementation of ontology engineering tools towards advancing their interoperability.

View PDFchevron_right
A Framework for Ontology Evolution in Collaborative Environments
Mark Musen

Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2006

With the wider use of ontologies in the Semantic Web and as part of production systems, multiple scenarios for ontology maintenance and evolution are emerging. For example, successive ontology versions can be posted on the (Semantic) Web, with users discovering the new versions serendipitously; ontology-development in a collaborative environment can be synchronous or asynchronous; managers of projects may exercise quality control, examining changes from previous baseline versions and accepting or rejecting them before a new baseline is published, and so on. In this paper, we present different scenarios for ontology maintenance and evolution that we have encountered in our own projects and in those of our collaborators. We define several features that categorize these scenarios. For each scenario, we discuss the high-level tasks that an editing environment must support. We then present a unified comprehensive set of tools to support different scenarios in a single framework, allowing users to switch between different modes easily.

View PDFchevron_right
Community-Driven Ontology Evolution Based on Folksonomies
Domenico Gendarmi

Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2006

The Semantic Web mission is to enable a better organization of the Web content to improve the searching, navigation and integration of the available information. Although the Semantic Web is intended for machines, the process of creating and maintaining it is a social one: only people, for example, have necessary skills to create and maintain ontologies. While most existing ontologies are designed by single individuals or small groups of experts, actual ontology users are not involved in the development process. Such an individual approach in creating ontologies, lead to a weak community grounding. On the other hand, Social Software is becoming increasingly popular among web users, giving opportunities to exploit the potential of collaboration within a community. Tools like wikis and folksonomies allow users to easily create new content and share contributions over a social network. Social Software tools can go beyond their current limits, by exploiting the power provided by semantic technologies. Conversely, Semantic Web tools can benefit from the ability of Social Software in fostering collaboration among users, by lowering entry barriers. In this paper we propose a new approach for ontology evolution, considering collaborative tagging systems as an opportunity to complement classic approaches used in maintaining ontologies.

View PDFchevron_right
Towards Community-Based Evolution of Knowledge-Intensive Systems
Robert Meersman

… conference on On the move to …, 2007

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Information Systems
  • Computer Science
  • Ontology
  • Digital Ecosystems
  • Emergent Systems
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved