Aspect-Oriented Ontology Development

  • Ralph Schäfermeier
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 160)

Abstract

In this paper, we describe our PhD research on an aspect-oriented approach for multi-dimensional specification of ontology modules driven by cross-cutting modularization requirements. The problem with existing modularization techniques lies in their respective focus on a single dimension along which a problem space can be segmented. We believe, however, that the majority of real-world ontology development scenarios is more complex, and that most applications have the potential for providing multiple cross-cutting modularization use cases. We examine commonalities between ontology modules and software aspects and propose an approach to applying the latter to the problem of a priori construction of modular ontologies and a posteriori ontology modularization.

Keywords

ontology modularization aspect-oriented development cross-cutting concerns 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    del Vescovo, C., Parsia, B., Sattler, U., Schneider, T.: The modular structure of an ontology: an empirical study. In: Proceedings of the 2010 conference on Modular Ontologies: Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop (WoMO 2010), pp. 11–24. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Grau, B.C., Parsia, B., Sirin, E., Kalyanpur, A.: Modularity and web ontologies. In: Doherty, P., Mylopoulos, J., Welty, C.A. (eds.) 10th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pp. 198–209. AAAI Press (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    d’Aquin, M.: Modularizing Ontologies. In: Suárez-Figueroa, M.C., Gómez-Pérez, A., Motta, E., Gangemi, A. (eds.) Ontology Engineering in a Networked World, pp. 213–233. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hoehndorf, R., Dumontier, M., Oellrich, A., Wimalaratne, S., Rebholz-Schuhmann, D., Schofield, P., Gkoutos, G.V.: A common layer of interoperability for biomedical ontologies based on OWL EL. Bioinformatics 27(7), 1001–1008 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Stvilia, B.: A model for ontology quality evaluation. First Monday 12(12) (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Di Maio, P.: Toward “Just Enough” Ontology Engineering. Cutter Consoritium Business Intelligence Executive Report 9(3) (March 2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Group, I.A.W.: IEEE standard 1471-2000, Recommended Practice for Architectural Description of Software-Intensive Systems. IEEE (2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Grau, B.C., Parsia, B., Sirin, E., Kalyanpur, A.: Automatic Partitioning of OWL Ontologies Using ε-Connections (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cuenca Grau, B., Parsia, B., Sirin, E.: Combining OWL ontologies using ε-Connections. Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 4(1), 40–59 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schlicht, A., Stuckenschmidt, H.: A Flexible Partitioning Tool for Large Ontologies. In: Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology, WI-IAT 2008, vol. 01, pp. 482–488. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Coskun, G., Rothe, M., Teymourian, K., Paschke, A.: Applying community detection algorithms on ontologies for indentifying concept groups. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Modular Ontologies, Ljubljana, Slovenia (September 2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Grau, B.C., Horrocks, I., Kazakov, Y., Sattler, U.: Extracting Modules from Ontologies: A Logic-Based Approach. In: [30], pp. 159–186, doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-01907-4Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Konev, B., Lutz, C., Walther, D., Wolter, F.: Semantic Modularity and Module Extraction in Description Logics. In: Proceedings of the 2008 Conference on ECAI 2008: 18th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 55–59. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Suntisrivaraporn, B.: Module Extraction and Incremental Classification: A Pragmatic Approach for \(\mathcal{EL}^+\) Ontologies. In: Bechhofer, S., Hauswirth, M., Hoffmann, J., Koubarakis, M. (eds.) ESWC 2008. LNCS, vol. 5021, pp. 230–244. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kontchakov, R., Wolter, F., Zakharyaschev, M.: Logic-based ontology comparison and module extraction, with an application to DL-Lite. Artificial Intelligence 174(15), 1093–1141 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Grau, B.C., Honavar, V., Schlicht, A., Wolter, F. (eds.): Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Modular Ontologies, WoMO 2007, Whistler, Canada, October 28, 2007. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 315. CEUR-WS.org (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    d’Aquin, M., Doran, P., Motta, E., Tamma, V.A.M.: Towards a parametric ontology modularization framework based on graph transformation. In: [16]Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Thakker, D., Dimitrova, V., Lau, L., Denaux, R., Karanasios, S., Yang-Turner, F.: A priori ontology modularisation in ill-defined domains. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Semantic Systems. I-Semantics 2011, pp. 167–170. ACM, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Doran, P., Palmisano, I., Tamma, V.A.M.: Somet: Algorithm and tool for sparql based ontology module extraction. In: Sattler, U., Tamilin, A. (eds.) WoMO. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 348. CEUR-WS.org (2008)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Filman, R., Friedman, D.: Aspect-Oriented Programming Is Quantification and Obliviousness. In: Workshop on Advanced Separation of Concerns, OOPSLA (2000)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Steimann, F.: Domain Models Are Aspect Free. In: Briand, L.C., Williams, C. (eds.) MoDELS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3713, pp. 171–185. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Priss, U.: Facet-like Structures in Computer Science. Axiomathes 18(2), 243–255 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dantas, D.S., Walker, D.: Harmless Advice. In: Conference Record of the 33rd ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, POPL 2006, pp. 383–396. ACM, New York (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Grau, B.C., Horrocks, I., Kazakov, Y., Sattler, U.: Modular Reuse of Ontologies: Theory and Practice. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 31, 273–318, ACM ID: 1622664 (2008)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Konev, B., Lutz, C., Walther, D., Wolter, F.: Formal Properties of Modularisation. In: [30], pp. 25–66, doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-01907-4Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Del Vescovo, C., Klinov, P., Parsia, B., Sattler, U., Schneider, T., Tsarkov, D.: Syntactic vs. Semantic Locality: How Good Is a Cheap Approximation? In: Schneider, T., Walther, D. (eds.) Workshop on Modular Ontologies (WoMO), pp. 40–50 (2012)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J., Ram, S.: Design Science in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly 28(1), 75–105 (2004)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M., Chatterjee, S.: A Design Science Research Methodology for Information Systems Research. Journal of Management Information Systems 24(3), 45–77 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    d’Aquin, M., Schlicht, A., Stuckenschmidt, H., Sabou, M.: Criteria and Evaluation for Ontology Modularization Techniques. In: Stuckenschmidt, H., Parent, C., Spaccapietra, S. (eds.) Modular Ontologies. LNCS, vol. 5445, pp. 67–89. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Stuckenschmidt, H., Parent, C., Spaccapietra, S. (eds.): Modular Ontologies: Concepts, Theories and Techniques for Knowledge Modularization. LNCS. Springer, Heidelberg (2009), doi:10.1007/978-3-642-01907-4Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ralph Schäfermeier
    • 1
  1. 1.Corporate Semantic Web GroupFreie Universität BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations