Identifying Key Concepts in an Ontology, through the Integration of Cognitive Principles with Statistical and Topological Measures

  • Silvio Peroni
  • Enrico Motta
  • Mathieu d’Aquin
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5367)

Abstract

In this paper we address the issue of identifying the concepts in an ontology, which best summarize what the ontology is about. Our approach combines a number of criteria, drawn from cognitive science, network topology, and lexical statistics. In the paper we show two versions of our algorithm, which have been evaluated against the results produced by human experts. We report that the latest version of the algorithm performs very well, exhibiting an excellent degree of correlation with the choices of the experts. While the generation of automatic methods for ontology summarization is an interesting research issue in itself, the work described here also provides a basis for novel approaches to a variety of ontology engineering tasks, including ontology matching, automatic classification, ontology modularization, and ontology evaluation.

Keywords

Ontology semantic web key concepts ontology summarization natural categories cognitive science 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    d’Aquin, M., Baldassarre, C., Gridinoc, L., Angeletou, S., Sabou, M., Motta, E.: Characterizing Knowledge on the Semantic Web with Watson.In: Workshop on Evaluation of Ontologies and Ontology-based tools, 5th International EON Workshop, collocated with the International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2007), Busan, Korea (2007)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Stefik, M.: The next knowledge medium. AI Magazine 7(1), 34–46 (1986)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    d’Aquin, M., Motta, E., Sabou, M., Angeletou, S., Gridinoc, L., Lopez, V., Guidi, D.: Towards a New Generation of Semantic Web Applications. IEEE Intelligent Systems 23(3), 20–28 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dzbor, M., Motta, E., Buil Aranda, C., Gomez, J.M., Goerlitz, O., Lewen, H.: Developing ontologies in OWL: An observational study. In: Workshop on OWL: Experiences & Directions, Georgia, US (November 2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Alani, H., Harris, S., O’Neil, B.: Winnowing ontologies based on application use. In: Sure, Y., Domingue, J. (eds.) ESWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4011, pp. 185–199. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Xiang, Z., Cheng, G., Qu, Y.: Ontology Summarization Based on RDF Sentence Graph. In: 16th International World Wide Web Conference (WWW2007), Banff, Alberta, Canada, May 8-12 (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rosch, E.: Principles of Categorization, Cognition and Categorization. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey, Mahwah (1978)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Uschold, M., Gruninger, M.: Ontologies: Principles, Methods and Applications. Knowledge Engineering Review 11(2), 93–136 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bercovici, N., Gröner, G., Schenk, S., Kubias, A., Dzbor, M.: Ontology customization and module creation: query-based customization operators and model. NeOn Project Deliverable D4.2.2 (February 2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Katifori, A., Halatsis, C., Lepouras, G., Vassilakis, C., Giannopoulou, E.: Ontology Visualization Methods - A Survey. ACM Computing Surveys 39(4) (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Silvio Peroni
    • 1
  • Enrico Motta
    • 1
  • Mathieu d’Aquin
    • 1
  1. 1.Knowledge Media InstituteThe Open UniversityMilton KeynesUnited Kingdom

Personalised recommendations