Requirements Behaviour Analysis for Ontology Testing

  • Alba Fernández-IzquierdoEmail author
  • Raúl García-Castro
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11313)


In the software engineering field, every software product is delivered with its pertinent associated tests which verify its correct behaviour. Besides, there are several approaches which, integrated in the software development process, deal with software testing, such as unit testing or behaviour-driven development. However, in the ontology engineering field there is a lack of clearly defined testing processes that can be integrated into the ontology development process. In this paper we propose a testing framework composed by a set of activities (i.e., test design, implementation and execution), with the goal of checking whether the requirements identified are satisfied by the formalization and analysis of their expected behaviour. This testing framework can be used in different types of ontology development life-cycles, or concerning other goals such as conformance testing between ontologies. In addition to this, we propose an RDF vocabulary to store, publish and reuse these test cases and their results, in order to allow traceability between the ontology, the test cases and their requirements. We validate our approach by integrating the testing framework into an ontology engineering process where an ontology network has been developed following agile principles.


Ontology testing Ontology requirements Ontology development 


  1. 1.
    Auer, S.: The RapidOWL Methodology - towards agile knowledge engineering. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Workshop on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructures for Collaborative Enterprises (WETICE 2006), pp. 352–357 (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Blomqvist, E., Seil Sepour, A., Presutti, V.: Ontology testing - methodology and tool. In: ten Teije, A., et al. (eds.) EKAW 2012. LNCS, vol. 7603, pp. 216–226. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). Scholar
  3. 3.
    Daga, E., et al.: NeOn D2.5.2 Pattern based ontology design: methodology and software supportGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dennis, M., van Deemter, K., Dell’Aglio, D., Pan, J.Z.: Computing authoring tests from competency questions: experimental validation. In: d’Amato, C., et al. (eds.) ISWC 2017. LNCS, vol. 10587, pp. 243–259. Springer, Cham (2017). Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fernández-López, M., Gómez-Pérez, A., Juristo, N.: Methontology: from ontological art towards ontological engineering. In: Proceedings of the Ontological Engineering AAAI 1997 Spring Symposium Series, pp. 33–40 (1997)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gangemi, A., Presutti, V.: Ontology design patterns. In: Staab, S., Studer, R. (eds.) Handbook on Ontologies, pp. 221–243. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). Scholar
  7. 7.
    García-Ramos, S., Otero, A., Fernández-López, M.: OntologyTest: a tool to evaluate ontologies through tests defined by the user. In: Omatu, S., et al. (eds.) IWANN 2009. LNCS, vol. 5518, pp. 91–98. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). Scholar
  8. 8.
    Grüninger, M., Fox, M.S.: Methodology for the Design and Evaluation of Ontologies (1995)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hamill, P.: Unit Test Frameworks: Tools for High-quality Software Development. O’Reilly Media Inc., Sebastopol (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Keet, C.M., Ławrynowicz, A.: Test-driven development of ontologies. In: Sack, H., et al. (eds.) ESWC 2016. LNCS, vol. 9678, pp. 642–657. Springer, Cham (2016). Scholar
  11. 11.
    Parkkila, J., et al.: An ontology for videogame interoperability. Multimedia Tools Appl. 76(4), 4981–5000 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Peroni, S.: A simplified agile methodology for ontology development. In: Dragoni, M., Poveda-Villalón, M., Jimenez-Ruiz, E. (eds.) OWLED/ORE 2016. LNCS, vol. 10161, pp. 55–69. Springer, Cham (2017). Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ren, Y., Parvizi, A., Mellish, C., Pan, J.Z., van Deemter, K., Stevens, R.: Towards competency question-driven ontology authoring. In: Presutti, V. (ed.) ESWC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8465, pp. 752–767. Springer, Cham (2014). Scholar
  14. 14.
    Solis, C., Wang, X.: A study of the characteristics of behaviour driven development. In: Proceedings on the EUROMICRO Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA 2011), pp. 383–387 (2011)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Suárez-Figueroa, M.C., Gómez-Pérez, A., Fernández-López, M.: The NeOn methodology for ontology engineering. In: Suárez-Figueroa, M.C., Gómez-Pérez, A., Motta, E., Gangemi, A. (eds.) Ontology Engineering in a Networked World, pp. 9–34. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). Scholar
  16. 16.
    Suárez-Figueroa, M.C., Gómez-Pérez, A., Villazón-Terrazas, B.: How to write and use the ontology requirements specification document. In: Meersman, R., Dillon, T., Herrero, P. (eds.) OTM 2009. LNCS, vol. 5871, pp. 966–982. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sure, Y., Erdmann, M., Angele, J., Staab, S., Studer, R., Wenke, D.: OntoEdit: collaborative ontology development for the semantic web. In: Horrocks, I., Hendler, J. (eds.) ISWC 2002. LNCS, vol. 2342, pp. 221–235. Springer, Heidelberg (2002). Scholar
  18. 18.
    Vrandečić, D., Gangemi, A.: Unit tests for ontologies. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z., Herrero, P. (eds.) OTM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4278, pp. 1012–1020. Springer, Heidelberg (2006). Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wynne, M., Hellesoy, A., Tooke, S.: The Cucumber Book: Behaviour-Driven Development for Testers and Developers. Pragmatic Bookshelf, Raleigh (2017)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alba Fernández-Izquierdo
    • 1
    Email author
  • Raúl García-Castro
    • 1
  1. 1.Ontology Engineering GroupUniversidad Politécnica de MadridMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations