The Role of Community Acceptance in Assessing Ontology Quality
Ontologies are crucial for the Semantic Web to flourish. Several communities are beginning to develop and maintain ontology repositories in different domains. Although a developer can often find multiple ontologies in the library that fit a particular domain, he or she then must select which of the potential ontologies would be most suitable for a specific purpose. Users, therefore, need a way to assess the quality of the ontologies stored in the library based upon a broad set of criteria; for example, the level of acceptance by the community of which it is a part. The history of an ontology’s development and the authority an ontology receives via links from other ontologies can be used to assess the level of endorsement within the group that shares its domain. This research defines metrics for history and authority within a community and shows how they can be weighted for a particular task. A case study demonstrates the usefulness of these metrics and discusses why they should be incorporated in any broad metrics suite that is used to rank ontologies in a library.
This research is supported by the departments of Computer Information Systems and Computer Science, Georgia State University and a 2016 School of Business Administration Spring/Summer Research Fellowship from Oakland University.
- 3.Hepp, M., Bachlechner, D., Siorpaes, K.: OntoWiki: community-driven ontology engineering and ontology usage based on Wikism. In: Proceedings of 2006 International Symposium on Wikis. ACM (2006)Google Scholar
- 9.History. In: Macmillan Online Dictionary. http://www.macmillandictionary.com
- 10.Sudol, R.: Revising: new essays for teachers of writing. National Council of Teachers of English, 1111 Kenyon Rd., Urbana, IL (1982)Google Scholar
- 11.Horning, A., Becker, A.: Revision: History, Theory, and Practice. Parlor Press, Anderson (2006)Google Scholar
- 12.Wellman, B.: An electronic group is virtually a social network. Cult. Internet 4, 179–205 (1997)Google Scholar
- 15.Noy, N.F., Fergerson, R.W., Musen, M.A.: The knowledge model of Protege-2000. In: Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management Methods, pp. 17–32 (2000)Google Scholar
- 19.Tartir, S., Arpinar, I.B., Moore, M., Sheth, A.P., Aleman-Meza, B.: OntoQA: metric-based ontology quality analysis (2005)Google Scholar
- 24.Vrandečić, D.: Ontology evaluation. In: Handbook on Ontologies, pp. 293–313 (2009)Google Scholar
- 25.Duque-Ramos, A., Fernández-Breis, J.T., Stevens, R., Aussenac-Gilles, N.: OQuaRE: a SQuaRE-based approach for evaluating the quality of ontologies. J. Res. Pract. Inf. Technol. 43, 159 (2011)Google Scholar