Towards a Quality Model for Semantic Technologies

  • Filip Radulovic
  • Raúl García-Castro
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6786)

Abstract

Semantic technologies have become widely adopted in the last years. However, in order to correctly evaluate them we need to ground evaluations in a common quality model. This paper presents some first steps towards the definition of such quality model for semantic technologies. First, some well-known software quality models are described, together with methods for extending them. Afterwards, a quality model for semantic technologies is defined by extending the ISO 9126 quality model.

Keywords

Quality Model Software Quality Ontology Language Semantic Technology Execution Error 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Behkamal, B., Kahani, M., Akbari, M.K.: Customizing ISO 9126 quality model for evaluation of B2B applications. Information and Software Technology 51(3), 599–609 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    OntoWeb: Ontoweb deliverable 1.3: A survey on ontology tools. Technical report, IST OntoWeb Thematic Network (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Guo, Y., Pan, Z., Heflin, J.: LUBM: A benchmark for OWL knowledge base systems. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 3(2-3), 158–182 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lambrix, P., Habbouche, M., Perez, M.: Evaluation of ontology development tools for bioinformatics. Bioinformatics 19, 1564 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    García-Castro, R., Gómez-Pérez, A.: Interoperability results for Semantic Web technologies using OWL as the interchange language. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 8, 278–291 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Garvin, D.A.: What does” product quality” really mean? Sloan Management Review 26(1), 25–43 (1984)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kitchenham, B., Pfleeger, S.L.: Software quality: the elusive target [special issues section]. IEEE Software 13(1), 12–21 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cavano, J.P., McCall, J.A.: A framework for the measurement of software quality. ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review 7(3-4), 133–139 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Boehm, B., Brown, J., Lipow, M.: Quantitative evaluation of software quality. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 592–605. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (1976)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    ISO: ISO/IEC 9126-1:2001, Software engineering – Product quality – Part 1: Quality model. Technical report, International Organization for Standardization (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Botella, P., Burgués, X., Carvallo, J., Franch, X., Pastor, J., Quer, C.: Towards a quality model for the selection of ERP systems. Component-Based Software Quality, 225–245 (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Azuma, M.: SQuaRE: the next generation of the ISO/IEC 9126 and 14598 international standards series on software product quality. In: ESCOM (European Software Control and Metrics Conference), pp. 337–346 (2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dromey, R.G.: Software Product Quality: Theory, Model, and Practice. Software Quality Institute, Brisbane, Australia (1998)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Franch, X., Carvallo, J.P.: Using quality models in software package selection. IEEE Software 20(1), 34–41 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Carvallo, J., Franch, X., Quer, C.: Defining a quality model for mail servers. In: Erdogmus, H., Weng, T. (eds.) ICCBSS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2580, pp. 51–61. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zulzalil, H., Ghani, A.A.A., Selamat, M.H., Mahmod, R.: A Case Study to Identify Quality Attributes Relationships for Web-based Applications. IJCSNS 8(11), 215 (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Padayachee, I., Kotze, P., van Der Merwe, A.: ISO 9126 external systems quality characteristics, sub-characteristics and domain specific criteria for evaluating e-Learning systems. In: The Southern African Computer Lecturers’ Association, University of Pretoria, South Africa (2010)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dominguez-Mayo, F., Escalona, M., Mejias, M., Torres, A.: A Quality Model in a Quality Evaluation Framework for MDWE Methodologies. In: 2010 Fourth International Conference on Research Challenges in Information Science (RCIS), pp. 495–506. IEEE, Los Alamitos (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cachero, C., Poels, G., Calero, C.: Towards a quality-aware Web Engineering process. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Workshop on Exploring Modeling Methods in Systems Analysis and Design (EMMSAD 2007), Citeseer, pp. 7–16 (2007)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    García-Castro, R., Grimm, S., Toma, I., Schneider, M., Marte, A., Tymaniuk, S.: D10.3 Results of the first evaluation of ontology engineering tools. Technical report, SEALS Consortium (2010)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yatskevich, M., Marte, A.: D11.3 Results of the first evaluation of advanced reasoning systems. Technical report, SEALS Consortium (2010)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Euzenat, J., Meilicke, C., Trojahn, C., Šváb Zamazal, O.: D12.3 Results of the first evaluation of matching tools. Technical report, SEALS Consortium (2010)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wrigley, S.N., Elbedweihy, K., Reinhard, D., Bernstein, A., Ciravegna, F.: D13.3 Results of the first evaluation of semantic search tools. Technical report, SEALS Consortium (2010)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tymaniuk, S., Cabral, L., Winkler, D., Toma, I.: D14.3 Results of the first evaluation of Semantic Web Service tools. Technical report, SEALS Consortium (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Filip Radulovic
    • 1
  • Raúl García-Castro
    • 2
  1. 1.Ontology Engineering Group, Departamento de Inteligencia ArtificialFacultad de Informática, Universidad Politécnica de MadridSpain
  2. 2.Ontology Engineering Group, Departamento de Lenguajes y Sistemas Informáticos e Ingeniería SoftwareFacultad de Informática, Universidad Politécnica de MadridSpain

Personalised recommendations