Ontologies and Human Users: A Systematic Analysis of the Influence of Ontology Documentation on Community Agreement About Type Membership

  • Francesca Zarl
  • Martin Hepp
  • Alex Stolz
  • Walter Gerbino
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10574)

Abstract

In this paper, we study the impact of the human-readable documentation of Web ontologies on the ability of human users to agree on the membership of instances according to a given ontology. We first introduce a model of the problem and then present a user study, in which we measured the impact of documentation features in schema.org on the quality of annotations with n = 73 study participants. The paper concludes with a discussion of implications for ontology design in the context of the Semantic Web.

Keywords

Ontology engineering Schema.org Data quality Human factors Ontology documentation Web ontologies 

References

  1. 1.
    Gruber, T.R.: A translation approach to portable ontology specifications. Knowl. Acquis. 5, 199–220 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gruber, T.: Every ontology is a treaty - a social agreement - among people with some common motive in sharing. AIS SIGSEMIS Bull. 1, 4–8 (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Guarino, N., Giaretta, P.: Ontologies and knowledge bases: towards a terminological clarification. In: Mars, N. (ed.) Towards Very Large Knowledge Bases: Knowledge Building and Knowledge Sharing, pp. 25–32. IOS Press, Amsterdam (1995)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hepp, M.: Ontologies: state of the art, business potential, and grand challenges. In: Hepp, M., de Leenheer, P., de Moor, A., Sure, Y. (eds.) Ontology Management: Semantic Web, Semantic Web Services, and Business Applications, pp. 3–22. Springer, Boston (2007). doi:10.1007/978-0-387-69900-4_1 Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Uschold, M., Grüninger, M.: Ontologies: principles, methods, and applications. Knowl. Eng. Rev. 11, 93–155 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gómez-Pérez, A., Fernández-López, M., Corcho, O.: Ontological Engineering. Springer, London (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Guarino, N., Welty, C.A.: Evaluating ontological decisions with ontoclean. Commun. ACM 45, 61–65 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Stark, J., Esswein, W.: Rules from Cognition for Conceptual Modelling. In: Atzeni, P., Cheung, D., Ram, S. (eds.) ER 2012. LNCS, vol. 7532, pp. 78–87. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-34002-4_6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chiew, V., Wang, Y.: From cognitive psychology to cognitive informatics. In: Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE International Conference on Cognitive Informatics, p. 114. IEEE Computer Society (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kotis, K., Vouros, A.: Human-centered ontology engineering: the HCOME methodology. Knowl. Inf. Syst. 10, 109–131 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Warren, P., Mulholland, P., Collins, T., Motta, E.: The Usability of Description Logics. In: Presutti, V., d’Amato, C., Gandon, F., d’Aquin, M., Staab, S., Tordai, A. (eds.) ESWC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8465, pp. 550–564. Springer, Cham (2014). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-07443-6_37 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wilmont, I., Hengeveld, S., Barendsen, E., Hoppenbrouwers, S.: Cognitive Mechanisms of Conceptual Modelling. In: Ng, W., Storey, Veda C., Trujillo, Juan C. (eds.) ER 2013. LNCS, vol. 8217, pp. 74–87. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-41924-9_7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Peroni, S., Motta, E., d’Aquin, M.: Identifying Key Concepts in an Ontology, through the Integration of Cognitive Principles with Statistical and Topological Measures. In: Domingue, J., Anutariya, C. (eds.) ASWC 2008. LNCS, vol. 5367, pp. 242–256. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-89704-0_17 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ernst, N.A., Storey, M.-A., Allen, P.: Cognitive support for ontology modeling. Int. J. Hum Comput Stud. 62, 553–577 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Engelbrecht, P.C., Dror, I.E.: How psychology and cognition can inform the creation of ontologies in semantic technologies. In: Proceedings of the 2009 conference on Information Modelling and Knowledge Bases XX, pp. 340–347. IOS Press (2009)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Evermann, J., Fang, J.: Evaluating ontologies: towards a cognitive measure of quality. Inf. Syst. 35, 391–403 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ramesh, V., Parsons, J., Browne, Glenn J.: What Is the Role of Cognition in Conceptual Modeling? A Report on the First Workshop on Cognition and Conceptual Modeling. In: Goos, G., Hartmanis, J., van Leeuwen, J., Chen, Peter P., Akoka, J., Kangassalu, H., Thalheim, B. (eds.) Conceptual Modeling: Current Issues and Future Directions. LNCS, vol. 1565, pp. 272–280. Springer, Heidelberg (1999). doi:10.1007/3-540-48854-5_21 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fox, M.S., Gruninger, M.: On ontologies and enterprise modelling. In: Kosanke, K., Nell, J.G. (eds.) International Conference on Enterprise Integration Modelling Technology, pp. 190–200. Springer, Heidelberg (1997). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-60889-6_22 Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Baker, T., Vandenbussche, P.-Y., Vatant, B.: Requirements for vocabulary preservation and governance. Libr. Hi Tech 31, 657–668 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    d’Aquin, M., Motta, E.: Watson, more than a Semantic Web search engine. Semant. Web J. 2, 55–63 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ehrlich, K.: The essential role of mental models in HCI: Card, Moran and Newell. In: Erikson, T., Mc.Donald, D.W. (eds.) HCI Remixed: Reflections on Works That Have Influenced the HCI Community, pp. 281–284. MIT Press (2008)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Macmillan, N.A., Creelman, C.D.: Detection Theory: A User’s Guide. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Francesca Zarl
    • 1
  • Martin Hepp
    • 2
  • Alex Stolz
    • 2
  • Walter Gerbino
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversità degli Studi di TriesteTriesteItaly
  2. 2.E-Business and Web Science Research GroupUniversität der Bundeswehr MünchenNeubibergGermany

Personalised recommendations