Skip to main content

Abstract

Ontology evaluation poses a number of difficult challenges requiring different evaluation methodologies, particularly for a “dynamic ontology” generated by a combination of automatic and semi-automatic methods. We review evaluation methods that focus solely on syntactic (formal) correctness, on the preservation of semantic structure, or on pragmatic utility. We propose two novel methods for dynamic ontology evaluation and describe the use of these methods for evaluating the different taxonomic representations that are generated at different times or with different amounts of expert feedback. These methods are then applied to the Indiana Philosophy Ontology (InPhO), and used to guide the ontology enrichment process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Buckner, C., Niepert, M., Allen, C.: From encyclopedia to ontology: Toward dynamic representation of the discipline of philosophy. Synthese (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  2. 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)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  3. Guarino, N., Welty, C.A.: An overview of OntoClean. In: Staab, S., Studer, R. (eds.) Handbook on Ontologies, 2nd edn., pp. 151–159. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Gómez-Pérez, A.: Evaluation of taxonomic knowledge in ontologies and knowledge bases. In: Proceedings of the 12th Banff Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-Based Systems Workshop, Banff, Alberta, Canada (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Fahad, M., Qadir, M.: A Framework for Ontology Evaluation. In: Proceedings International Conference on Conceptual Structures (ICCS), Toulouse, France, pp. 7–11. Citeseer (July 2008)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Dellschaft, K., Staab, S.: Strategies for the Evaluation of Ontology Learning. In: Buitelaar, P., Cimiano, P. (eds.) Ontology Learning and Population: Bridging the Gap Between Text and Knowledge, pp. 253–272. IOS Press (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Maedche, A., Staab, S.: Measuring Similarity Between Ontologies. In: Gómez-Pérez, A., Benjamins, V.R. (eds.) EKAW 2002. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2473, pp. 251–263. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Brewster, C., Alani, H., Dasmahapatra, S., Wilks, Y.: Data driven ontology evaluation. In: Proceedings of LREC, vol. 2004 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Supekar, K.: A peer-review approach for ontology evaluation. In: 8th Int. Protege Conf., pp. 77–79. Citeseer (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Staab, S., Gómez-Pérez, A., Daelemans, W., Reinberger, M.L., Guarino, N., Noy, N.F.: Why evaluate ontology technologies? because it works! IEEE Intelligent Systems 19, 74–81 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Lozano-Tello, A., Gómez-Pérez, A.: Ontometric: A method to choose the appropriate ontology. Journal of Database Management 15, 1–18 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Brank, J., Grobelnik, M., Mladenic, D.: Survey of ontology evaluation techniques. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Data Mining and Data Warehouses (SiKDD) (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Velardi, P., Navigli, R., Cucchiarelli, A., Neri, F.: Evaluation of OntoLearn, a methodology for automatic learning of domain ontologies. In: Buitelaar, P., Cimiano, P., Magnini, B. (eds.) Ontology Learning from Text: Methods, Evaluation and Applications. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Porzel, R., Malaka, R.: A task-based framework for ontology learning, population and evaluation. In: Buitelaar, P., Cimiano, P., Magnini, B. (eds.) Ontology Learning from Text: Methods, Evaluation and Applications. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Gruber, T.R.: Toward principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing. International Journal of Human Computer Studies 43, 907–928 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Noy, N., McGuinness, D.: Ontology development 101: A guide to creating your first ontology (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Niepert, M., Buckner, C., Allen, C.: A dynamic ontology for a dynamic reference work. In: Proceedings of the 7th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries, p. 297. ACM (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Niepert, M., Buckner, C., Allen, C.: Answer set programming on expert feedback to populate and extend dynamic ontologies. In: Proceedings of 21st FLAIRS (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Smyth, P., Goodman, R.M.: An information theoretic approach to rule induction from databases. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering 4, 301–316 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Shannon, C.E.: A mathematical theory of communication. University of Illinois Press, Urbana (1949)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Smith, B.: Ontology. In: Luciano, F. (ed.) Blackweel Guide to the Philosophy of Computing and Information, pp. 155–166. Blackwell, Oxford (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kuhn, T.: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press (1962)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Jiang, J., Conrath, D.: Semantic similarity based on corpus statistics and lexical taxonomy. In: Proceedings of International Conference Research on Computational Linguistics (ROCLING X), Number Rocling X, Taiwan (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Resnik, P.: Semantic similarity in a taxonomy: An information-based measure and its application to problems of ambiguity in natural language. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 11, 95–130 (1999)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Lin, D.: An information-theoretic definition of similarity. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 296–304. Citeseer (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Eckert, K., Niepert, M., Niemann, C., Buckner, C., Allen, C., Stuckenschmidt, H.: Crowdsourcing the Assembly of Concept Hierarchies. In: Proceedings of the 10th ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL), Brisbane, Australia. ACM Press (2010)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Murdock, J., Buckner, C., Allen, C. (2013). Evaluating Dynamic Ontologies. In: Fred, A., Dietz, J.L.G., Liu, K., Filipe, J. (eds) Knowledge Discovery, Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management. IC3K 2010. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 272. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29764-9_18

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29764-9_18

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-29763-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-29764-9

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics