LIME: The Metadata Module for OntoLex

  • Manuel Fiorelli
  • Armando Stellato
  • John P. McCrae
  • Philipp Cimiano
  • Maria Teresa Pazienza
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9088)

Abstract

The OntoLex W3C Community Group has been working for more than three years on a shared lexicon model for ontologies, called lemon. The lemon model consists of a core model that is complemented by a number of modules accounting for specific aspects in the modeling of lexical information within ontologies. In many usage scenarios, the discovery and exploitation of linguistically grounded ontologies may benefit from summarizing information about their linguistic expressivity and lexical coverage by means of metadata. That situation is compounded by the fact that lemon allows the independent publication of ontologies, lexica and lexicalizations linking them. While the VoID vocabulary already addresses the need for general metadata about interlinked datasets, it is unable by itself to represent the more specific metadata relevant to lemon. To solve this problem, we developed a module of lemon, named LIME (Linguistic Metadata), which extends VoID with a vocabulary of metadata about the ontology-lexicon interface.

Keywords

Ontolex Metadata Ontologies Natural language Discovery 

References

  1. 1.
    Cimiano, P., Buitelaar, P., McCrae, J., Sintek, M.: LexInfo: a declarative model for the lexicon-ontology interface. Web Seman. Sci. Serv. Agents World Wide Web 9(1), 29–51 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pazienza, M.T., Sguera, S., Stellato, A.: Let’s talk about our “being”: a linguistic-based ontology framework for coordinating agents. Appl. Ontology Spec. Issue Formal Ontol. Commun. Agents 2(3–4), 305–332 (2007)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Unger, C., Freitas, A., Cimiano, P.: An introduction to question answering over linked data. In: Koubarakis, M., Stamou, G., Stoilos, G., Horrocks, I., Kolaitis, P., Lausen, G., Weikum, G. (eds.) Reasoning Web. LNCS, vol. 8714, pp. 100–140. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Atzeni, P., Basili, R., Hansen, D.H., Missier, P., Paggio, P., Pazienza, M.T., Zanzotto, F.M.: Ontology-based question answering in a federation of university sites: the moses case study. In: Meziane, F., Métais, E. (eds.) NLDB 2004. LNCS, vol. 3136, pp. 413–420. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Basili, R., Vindigni, M., Zanzotto, F.M.: Integrating ontological and linguistic knowledge for conceptual information extraction. In: IEEE/WIC International Conference on Web Intelligence, Washington (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cimiano, P.: Ontology Learning and Population from Text Algorithms, Evaluation and Applications XXVIII. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bouayad-Agha, N., Casamayor, G., Wanner, L.: Natural language generation in the context of the semantic web. Seman. Web 5(6), 493–513 (2014)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bontcheva, K., Wilks, Y.: Automatic report generation from ontologies: the MIAKT approach. In: Meziane, F., Métais, E. (eds.) NLDB 2004. LNCS, vol. 3136, pp. 324–335. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Galanis, D., Androutsopoulos, I.: Generating multilingual descriptions from linguistically annotated OWL ontologies: the NaturalOWL system. In: Proceedings of the Eleventh European Workshop on Natural Language Generation, Stroudsburg, pp. 143–146 (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pazienza, M.T., Stellato, A., Turbati, A.: Linguistic watermark 3.0: an RDF framework and a software library for bridging language and ontologies in the semantic web. In: 5th Italian Semantic Web Workshop on Semantic Web Applications and Perspectives (SWAP 2008), FAO-UN, Rome, Italy, 15–17 December 2008Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Oltramari, A., Stellato, A.: Enriching ontologies with linguistic content: an evaluation framework. In: The Role of OntoLex Resources in Building the Infrastructure of Web 3.0: Vision and Practice (OntoLex 2008), Marrakech, Morocco, 31 May 2008Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cimiano, P., Haase, P., Herold, M., Mantel, M., Buitelaar, P.: LexOnto: a model for ontology lexicons for ontology-based NLP. In: Proceedings of the OntoLex 2007 Workshop (held in conjunction with ISWC 2007) (2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Buitelaar, P., Declerck, T., Frank, A., Racioppa, S., Kiesel, M., Sintek, M., Engel, R., Romanelli, M., Sonntag, D., Loos, B., Micelli, V., Porzel, R., Cimiano, P.: LingInfo: design and applications of a model for the integration of linguistic information in ontologies. In: OntoLex 2006, Genoa, Italy (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Montiel-Ponsoda, E., Aguado-de-Cea, G., Gómez-Pérez, A., Peters, W.: Enriching ontologies with multilingual information. Nat. Lang. Eng. 17, 283–309 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    McCrae, J., Aguado-de-Cea, G., Buitelaar, P., Cimiano, P., Declerck, T., Gómez-Pérez, A., Gracia, J., Hollink, L., Montiel-Ponsoda, E., Spohr, D., Wunner, T.: Interchanging lexical resources on the Semantic Web. Lang. Resour. Eval. 46(4), 701–719 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chiarcos, C., McCrae, J., Cimiano, P., Fellbaum, C.: Towards open data for linguistics: linguistic linked data. In: Oltramari, A., Vossen, P., Qin, L., Hovy, E. (eds.) New Trends of Research in Ontologies and Lexical Resources, pp. 7–25. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-31782-8_2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    McCrae, J., Fellbaum, C., Cimiano, P.: Publishing and linking wordnet using lemon and RDF. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Linked Data in Linguistics, Reykjavik, Iceland (2014)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Miller, G.: WordNet: a lexical database for english. Commun. ACM 38(11), 39–41 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fellbaum, C.: WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database. WordNet Pointers, MIT Press, Cambridge (1998)MATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jain, P., Hitzler, P., Yeh, P., Verma, K., Sheth, A.: Linked data is merely more data. In: AAAI Spring Symposium: Linked Data Meets Artificial Intelligence (2010)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Alexander, K., Cyganiak, R., Hausenblas, M., Zhao, J.: Describing linked datasets with the VoID vocabulary (W3C Interest Group Note). In: World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). http://www.w3.org/TR/void/. Accessed 3 March 2011
  22. 22.
    Auer, S., Demter, J., Martin, M., Lehmann, J.: LODStats – an extensible framework for high-performance dataset analytics. In: ten Teije, A., Völker, J., Handschuh, S., Stuckenschmidt, H., d’Acquin, M., Nikolov, A., Aussenac-Gilles, N., Hernandez, N. (eds.) EKAW 2012. LNCS, vol. 7603, pp. 353–362. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-33876-2_31 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    W3C: data catalog vocabulary (DCAT). In: World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). http://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dcat/. Accessed 16 Jan 2014
  24. 24.
    Bird, S., Simons, G.: Extending dublin core metadata to support the description and discovery of language resources. Comput. Humanit. 37(4), 375–388 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lagoze, C., Van de Sompel, H.: The open archives initiative: building a low-barrier interoperability framework. In: Proceedings of the 1st ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries, New York, pp. 54–62 (2001)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Calzolari, N., Del Gratta, R., Francopoulo, G., Mariani, J., Rubino, F., Russo, I., Soria, C.: The LRE map. Harmonising community descriptions of resources. In: Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2012), Istanbul, Turkey, pp. 1084–1089 (2012)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Piperidis, S.: The META-SHARE language resources sharing infrastructure: principles, challenges, solutions. In: Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Language, Istanbul, Turkey, pp. 36–42 (2012)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Fiorelli, M., Pazienza, M.T., Stellato, A.: LIME: towards a metadata module for ontolex. In: 2nd Workshop on Linked Data in Linguistics: Representing and Linking Lexicons, Terminologies and Other Language Data, Pisa, Italy (2013)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Borin, L., Dannélls, D., Forsberg, M., McCrae, J.: Representing swedish lexical resources in RDF with lemon. In: Proceedings of the ISWC 2014 Posters & Demonstrations Track a Track Within the 13th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC 2014), Riva del Garda, Italy, pp. 329–332 (2014)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ehrmann, M., Cecconi, F., Vannella, D., McCrae, J., Cimiano, P., Navigli, R.: Representing multilingual data as linked data: the case of BabelNet 2.0. In: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC-2014), Reykjavik, Iceland, 26–31 May 2014, pp. 401–408 (2014)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Eckle-Kohler, J., McCrae, J., Chiarcos, C.: LemonUby - a large, interlinked syntactically-rich lexical resources for ontologies. Semantic Web Journal (2015, accepted)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sérasset, G.: Dbnary: wiktionary as a LMF based multilingual RDF network. In: Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC-2012), Istanbul, Turkey, 23–25 May 2012, pp. 2466-2472 (2012)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Buitelaar, P.: Ontology-based semantic lexicons: mapping between terms and object descriptions. In: Huang, C.-R., Calzolari, N., Gangemi, A., Lenci, A., Oltramari, A., Prevot, L. (eds.) Ontology and the Lexicon: A Natural Language Processing Perspective. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2010)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Cimiano, P., McCrae, J., Buitelaar, P., Montiel-Ponsoda, E.: On the role of senses in the ontology-lexicon. In: Oltramari, A., Vossen, P., Qin, L., Hovy, E. (eds.) New Trends of Research in Ontologies and Lexical Resources, pp. 43–62. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Evans, V.: Lexical concepts, cognitive models and meaning-construction. Cogn. Linguist. 17(4), 491–534 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Cimiano, P., Unger, C., McCrae, J.: Ontology-based interpretation of natural language. Synth. Lect. Hum. Lang. Technol. 7(2), 1–178 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Pazienza, M.T., Stellato, A.: An environment for semi-automatic annotation of ontological knowledge with linguistic content. In: Sure, Y., Domingue, J. (eds.) ESWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4011, pp. 442–456. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    ISO, International organization for standardization: language codes - ISO 639. In: ISO, International Organization for Standardization. http://www.iso.org/iso/home/standards/language_codes.htm
  39. 39.
    Fiorelli, M., Pazienza, M.T., Stellato, A.: A meta-data driven platform for semi-automatic configuration of ontology mediators. In: Calzolari, N., Choukri, K., Declerck, T., Loftsson, H., Maegaard, B., Mariani, J., Moreno, A., Odijk, J., Piperidis, S. (eds.) Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2014), Reykjavik, Iceland, May 2014Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Manuel Fiorelli
    • 1
  • Armando Stellato
    • 1
  • John P. McCrae
    • 2
  • Philipp Cimiano
    • 2
  • Maria Teresa Pazienza
    • 1
  1. 1.ART Research GroupUniversity of Rome “Tor Vergata”RomeItaly
  2. 2.Cognitive Interaction Technology Center of ExcellenceUniversity of BielefeldBielefeldGermany

Personalised recommendations