Ontology Engineering Revisited: An Iterative Case Study

  • Christoph Tempich
  • H. Sofia Pinto
  • Steffen Staab
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4011)

Abstract

Existing mature ontology engineering approaches are based on some basic assumptions that are often violated in practice, in particular in the Semantic Web. 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 and ontologies have a life cycle that involves an iteration back and forth between construction/modification and use. While recently there have been some initial proposals to consider these issues, they lack the appropriate rigor of mature approaches. i.e. these recent proposals lack the appropriate depth of methodological description, which makes the methodology usable, and they lack a proof of concept by a long-lived case study. In this paper, we revisit mature and new ontology engineering methodologies. We provide an elaborate methodology that takes decentralization, partial autonomy and iteration into account and we demonstrate its proof-of-concept in a real-world cross-organizational case study.

References

  1. 1.
    Gómez-Pérez, A., Fernández-López, M., Corcho, O.: Ontological Engineering. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Staab, S., Schnurr, H.P., Studer, R., Sure, Y.: Knowledge processes and ontologies. IEEE Intelligent Systems 16 (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Uschold, M., King, M.: Towards a methodology for building ontologies. In: Proc. of IJCAI 1995, WS, Montreal, Canada (1995)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pinto, H.S., Staab, S., Sure, Y., Tempich, C.: OntoEdit empowering SWAP: a case study in supporting DIstributed, Loosely-controlled and evolvInG Engineering of oNTologies (DILIGENT). In: Bussler, C.J., Davies, J., Fensel, D., Studer, R. (eds.) ESWS 2004. LNCS, vol. 3053, pp. 16–30. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kotis, K., Vouros, G.A., Alonso, J.P.: HCOME: tool-supported methodology for collaboratively devising living ontologies. In: Bussler, C.J., Tannen, V., Fundulaki, I. (eds.) SWDB 2004. LNCS, vol. 3372, pp. 155–166. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Benjamins, V.R., Fensel, D., Decker, S., Gómez-Pérez, A. (KA)2: Building ontologies for the internet. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies (IJHCS) 51, 687–712 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sure, Y., Tempich, C., Vrandečić, Z.: D7.1.1. SEKT methodolgoy: Survey and initial framework. SEKT deliverable 7.1.1, Institute AIFB, University of Karlsruhe (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pinto, H.S., Martins, J.: Evolving Ontologies in Distributed and Dynamic Settings. In: Proc. of the 8th Int. Conf. on Princ. of Knowledge Representation & Reasoning (KR 2002) (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Holsapple, C.W., Joshi, K.D.: A collaborative approach to ontology design. Commun. ACM 45, 42–47 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pinto, H.S., Staab, S., Tempich, C.: DILIGENT: Towards a fine-grained methodology for DIstributed, Loosely-controlled and evolvInG Engineering of oNTologies. In: Proceedings of the 16th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ECAI 2004) (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Noy, N., Fergerson, R., Musen, M.: The knowledge model of protégé-2000: Combining interoperability and flexibility. In: Dieng, R., Corby, O. (eds.) EKAW 2000. LNCS, vol. 1937, pp. 17–32. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tempich, C., Pinto, H.S., Sure, Y., Staab, S.: An argumentation ontology for DIstributed, Loosely-controlled and evolvInG Engineering processes of oNTologies (DILIGENT). In: Gómez-Pérez, A., Euzenat, J. (eds.) ESWC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3532, pp. 241–256. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Maedche, A., Motik, B., Stojanovic, L.: Managing multiple and distributed ontologies on the semantic web. The VLDB Journal 12, 286–302 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christoph Tempich
    • 2
  • H. Sofia Pinto
    • 1
  • Steffen Staab
    • 3
  1. 1.Dep. de Engenharia InformáticaInstituto Superior TécnicoLisboaPortugal
  2. 2.Institute AIFBUniversity of Karlsruhe (TH)KarlsruheGermany
  3. 3.ISWebUniversity of Koblenz LandauKoblenzGermany

Personalised recommendations