The old two talks hold given you a basic thought about the two principal attacks for begining developing an ontologytop-down and bottom-upbut they make not represent an encompassing methodology
to develop ontologies. In point of fact, there is no proper, up-to-date comprehensive methodology for ontology development like there is for conceptual framework development (e.g., [ 1 ] ) or falls ' versus agile ' package development methodologies. There are many methods
and, among others, the W3C's Semantic Web best practices
, though, which to a greater or lesser extent can organise component of a comprehensive ontology development methodology.
As a opening towards methodologies that gives a general orbit, we will look at a scope of parameters that impact ontology development in one mode or another [ 2 ]. There are four influential factors to raise the efficiency and effectivity of developing ontologies, which need to make with the aim ( secs ) of the ontology; what to recycle from bing ontologies and ontology-like artefacts you said it to reprocess them; the types of attacks for bottom-up ontology development from other bequest rootage; and the interaction with the selection of representation language and reasoning services.
2nd, methods that aids the ontologist in certain labor of the ontology technology procedure include, but are not bounded to, aiding the molding itself, how to incorporate ontologies, and supporting package tools. We will take a closer expression at OntoClean
[ 3 ] that adds to modelling taxonomies. One might inquire oneself: who cares, after all we hold the ratiocinator to assort our taxonomy anyhow, right? So, but that works only you hold declared many belongings for the categories, which is not e'er the instance, and the ratiocinator screens out the logical issues, but not the onto
logical issues. OntoClean employs several notions from ism, such as rigidness, individuality standards, and wholeness [ 4, 5 ] to furnish modelling guidelines. For example, that anti-rigid holdings can not subsume stiff holdings;e.g., if we hold, state, both Educatee and Individual in our ontology, the former is subsumed by the latter. The talk will move into some point of OntoClean.
If, but then, you make hold a rich ontology and not mostly a nude taxonomy, debugging ' by availing of an automated ratiocinator is utile particularly with biggerer ontologies and ontologies corresponded in an expressive ontology language. Such debugging ' spells under footings like glass box reasoning [ 6 ], justification [ 7 ], account [ 8 ], and pinpointing mistakes. While they are utile themes, we will pass relatively small clip thereon, because it necessitates some more noesis of Description Logics and its ( mostly tableaux-based ) reasoning algorithms that will be presented merely in the 2 Nd
semester ( principally thought for the EMCL educatees ). Those techniques utilise the machine-controlled ratiocinator to at least locate
moulding mistakes and explicate in the most compendious manner why
this is so, alternatively of simply returning a cluster of inconsistent categories; advising
possible jams is yet a measure farther ( one such reasoning service will be demonstrated in talk 6 on Dec 1 ).
Aside from parameters, methods, and tools, there are justly few methodologies, which are even mealy: they make not ( yet ) comprise all the substitutions at each measure, IE. what
and how
to make each measure, given the recent developments. A relatively comprehensive one is Methontology [ 10 ], which holds been utilise to assorted capable fields (e.g., chemicals, legal field [ 9, 11 ] ) since its development in the late Ninetieses. While some practicalities are supercede with new [ 12 ] and even newer languages and tools, some of the nucleus aspects still keep. The five main stairs are: spec, formulation ( with intermediate representations
, such as in text or diagrams, like with ORM [ 1 ] and prosecuted by the moulding wiki MOKI
that was developed during the APOSDLE project
for work-integrated acquisition ), formalisation, execution, and upkeep. So there are assorted supporting labor, such as certification and version control.
Last, but not least, there are many tools that aid you with one method or another. WebODE
purposes to support Methontology, the NeOn toolkit
designs to support alloted development of ontologies, RacerPlus
for sophisticated querying, Protg-PROMPT
for ontology desegregation ( there are many other plug-ins
for Protg ), SWOOGLE
to seek across ontologies, OntoClean with Protg
, and so forth etcetera. For much longer lists of tools, see the listing of semantic web development tools
, the overplus of ontology reasoners and editors
, and ambit of semantic wiki projects engines and features
for collaborative ontology development. Bumping the right tool to work the job at manus ( if it 's ) is a accomplishment of its ain and it is a necessary one to bump a viable solution to the job at mitt. From a engineerings stand, the more you cognise about the ends, features, strengths, and failings of available tools ( and hold the creativeness to develop new ones, if postulate ), the higher the likeliness you take a possible solution of a job to successful completion.
Mentions
[ 1 ] Halpin, Thymine, Morgan, T: Info molding and relational databases. 2nd edn. Morgan Kaufmann ( 2008 )
[ 2 ] Keet, Centimeter. Ontology design parameters for aligning agri-informatics with the Semantic Web
3rd International Conference on Metadata and Semantics ( MTSR'09 ) Special Path on Agribusiness, Nutrient & Environment, October 1-2 2009 Milano, Italia. F Sartori, Mom Sicilia, and N Manouselis ( EDS ), Impost CCIS 46, 239-244.
[ 3 ] Guarino, Nitrogen and Welty, C. An Overview of OntoClean
in S Staab, R Studer ( EDS ), Enchiridion on Ontologies, Impost Verlag 2004, pp. 151-172
[ 4 ] Guarino, N, Welty, C: A formal ontology of properties
In: Dieng, R, Corby, O. ( EDS. ) EKAW 2000. LNAI, vol. 1937, pp. 97-112. Impost, Heidelberg ( 2000 )
[ 5 ] Guarino, N, Welty, C: Identity, unity, and individuality: towards a formal toolkit for ontological analysis
In: Proc. of ECAI 2000. IOS Imperativeness, Amsterdam ( 2000 )
[ 6 ] Parsia, B, Sirin, Tocopherol, Kalyanpur, A. Debugging OWL ontologies
Web Conference ( Web 2005 ). May 10-14, 2005, Chiba, Japan.
[ 7 ] Meter Horridge, B Parsia, and Uracil Sattler. Laconic and Precise Justifications in OWL
In Proc. of the Seventh International Semantic Web Conference ( ISWC 2008 ), Vol. 5318 of LNCS, Impost, 2008.
[ 8 ] Alexander Borgida, Diego Calvanese, and Mariano Rodriguez-Muro. Explanation in the DL-Lite family of description logics
In Proc. of the Seventh Int. Conf. on Ontologies, DataBases, and Applications of Semantics ( ODBASE 2008 ), LNCS vol 5332, 1440-1457. Impost, 2008.
[ 9 ] Fernandez, Meter; Gomez-Perez, Angstrom Pazos, A; Pazos, Joule. Building a Chemical Ontology using METHONTOLOGY and the Ontology Design Environment
IEEE Expert: Special Issue on Uses of Ontologies, January/February 1999, 37-46.
[ 10 ] Gomez-Perez, Angstrom; Fernandez-Lopez, Meter; Corcho, Oxygen Ontological Technology. Impost Verlag London Ltd. 2004.
[ 11 ] Oscar Corcho, Mariano Fernndez-Lpez, Asuncin Gmez-Prez, Angel Lpez-Cima. Building legal ontologies with METHONTOLOGY and WebODE
Jurisprudence and the Semantic Web 2005. Impost LNAI 3369, 142-157.
[ 12 ] Corcho, Oxygen, Fernandez-Lopez, M and Gomez-Perez, Angstrom. ( 2003 ). Methodologies, tools and languages for building ontologies. Where is their meeting point?
Information & Cognition Technology 46 ( 1 ): 41-64.
Observe: mentions 2, 3, and 9 are required reading, 6, 7, and 10 advocated, and 1, 4, 5, 8, 11, and 12 are optional.
Talk notes: talk 5 - Methodologies [ nexus TBA ]
Course webpage
Related posts:
What other jobs can be linked with Diabetes?
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif?v=92.1){kind=small}
, Java, OpenSolaris and other undertaking. 
</a>
