Ontology Engineering Methodology

Chapter
Part of the International Handbooks on Information Systems book series (INFOSYS)

Summary

In this chapter we present a methodology for introducing and maintaining ontology based knowledge management applications into enterprises with a focus on Knowledge Processes and Knowledge Meta Processes. While the former process circles around the usage of ontologies, the latter process guides their initial set up.We illustrate our methodology by an example from a case study on skills management. The methodology serves as a scaffold for Part B “Ontology Engineering” of the handbook. It shows where more specific concerns of ontology engineering find their place and how they are related in the overall process.

References

  1. 1.
    A. Abecker, A. Bernardi, K. Hinkelmann, O. Kuehn, and M. Sintek. Toward a technology for organizational memories. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 13(3):40–48, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    J. C. Arpírez, O. Corcho, M. Fernández-López, and A. Gómez-Pérez. WebODE: A scalable workbench for ontological engineering. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Knowledge Capture (K-CAP) Oct. 21–23, 2001, Victoria, BC, Canada, 2001.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. Bonifacio, T. Franz, and S. Staab. A Four-Layer Model for Information Technology Support of Knowledge Management, chapter 6. Advances in Management Information Systems. M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, NY, 2008.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    T. Buzan. Use your head. BBC Books, 1974.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    T. H. Davenport and L. Prusak. Working Knowledge – How organisations manage what they know. Havard Business School Press, Boston, MA, 1998.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    J. Davies, D. Fensel, and F. van Harmelen, editors. On-To-Knowledge: Semantic Web enabled Knowledge Management. Wiley, New York, 2002.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    R. Dieng, O. Corby, A. Giboin, and M. Ribiere. Methods and tools for corporate knowledge management. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 51(3):567–598, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. M. Fairchild. Knowledge management metrics via a balanced scorecard methodology. In HICSS. Proceedings of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2002, pages 3173–3180, 2002.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. Fernández-López. Overview of methodologies for building ontologies. In Proceedings of the IJCAI-99 Workshop on Ontologies and Problem-Solving Methods: Lessons Learned and Future Trends. CEUR, Aachen, Germany, 1999.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    M. Fernandéz-López, A. Gómez-Pérez, J. Euzenat, A. Gangemi, Y. Kalfoglou, D. M. Pisanelli, M. Schorlemmer, G. Steve, L. Stojanovic, G. Stumme, and Y. Sure. A survey on methodologies for developing, maintaining, integrating, evaluating and reengineering ontologies. OntoWeb deliverable 1.4, Universidad Politecnia de Madrid, 2002.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    M. Fernández-López, A. Gómez-Pérez, J. P. Sierra, and A. P. Sierra. Building a chemical ontology using Methontology and the Ontology Design Environment. Intelligent Systems, 14(1), 1999.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    A. Gómez-Pérez. A framework to verify knowledge sharing technology. Expert Systems with Application, 11(4):519–529, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    A. Gómez-Pérez, M. Fernandéz-López, O. Corcho, T. T. Ahn, N. Aussenac-Gilles, S. Bernardos, V. Christophides, O. Corby, P. Crowther, Y. Ding, R. Engels, M. Esteban, F. Gandon, Y. Kalfoglou, G. Karvounarakis, M. Lama, A. López, A. Lozano, A. Magkanaraki, D. Manzano, E. Motta, N. Noy, D. Plexousakis, J. A. Ramos, and Y. Sure. Technical roadmap. OntoWeb deliverable 1.1.2, Universidad Politecnia de Madrid, 2002.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    T. R. Gruber. Towards principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 43(5/6):907–928, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    N. Guarino and C. Welty. Evaluating ontological decisions with OntoClean. Communications of the ACM, 45(2):61–65, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Peter Haase, Frank van Harmelen, Zhisheng Huang, Heiner Stuckenschmidt, and York Sure. A framework for handling inconsistency in changing ontologies. In Y. Gil, E. Motta, V. R. Benjamins, and M. A. Musen, editors, Proceedings of the Fourth International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC2005), volume 3729 of LNCS, pages 353–367. Springer, Berlin, 2005.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    P. Haase, J. Vlker, and Y. Sure. Management of dynamic knowledge. Journal of Knowledge Management, 9(5):97–107, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    R. S. Kaplan and D. P. Norton. The balanced scorecard – Measures that drive performance. Harvard Business Review, 71ff, January–February 1992.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    T. Lau and Y. Sure. Introducing ontology-based skills management at a large insurance company. In Proceedings of the Modellierung 2002, pages 123–134, Tutzing, Germany, March 2002.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    A. Léger, H. Akkermans, M. Brown, J.-M. Bouladoux, R. Dieng, Y. Ding, A. Gómez-Pérez, S. Handschuh, A. Hegarty, A. Persidis, R. Studer, Y. Sure, V. Tamma, and B. Trousse. Successful scenarios for ontology-based applications. OntoWeb deliverable 2.1, France Télécom R&D, 2002.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    A. Léger, Y. Bouillon, M. Bryan, R. Dieng, Y. Ding, M. Fernandéz-López, A. Gómez-Pérez, P. Ecoublet, A. Persidis, and Y. Sure. Best practices and guidelines. OntoWeb deliverable 2.2, France Télécom R&D, 2002.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    D. O’Leary. Using AI in knowledge management: Knowledge bases and ontologies. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 13(3):34–39, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    D. O’Leary and R. Studer. Knowledge management: An interdisciplinary approach. IEEE Intelligent Systems, Special Issue on Knowledge Management, 16(1), 2001.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    H. S. Pinto, S. Staab, and C. Tempich. Diligent: Towards a fine-grained methodology for distributed, loosely-controlled and evolving engineering of ontologies. In ECAI, pages 393–397, 2004.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    G. Probst, K. Romhardt, and S. Raub. Managing Knowledge. Wiley, New York, 1999.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    G. Schreiber, H. Akkermans, A. Anjewierden, R. de Hoog, N. Shadbolt, W. van de Velde, and B. Wielinga. Knowledge Engineering and Management – The CommonKADS Methodology. MIT, Cambridge, MA, 1999.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    S. Staab, H.-P. Schnurr, R. Studer, and Y. Sure. Knowledge processes and ontologies. IEEE Intelligent Systems, Special Issue on Knowledge Management, 16(1):26–34, 2001.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    S. Staab and H. Stuckenschmidt, editors. Semantic Web and Peer-to-Peer. Springer, Berlin, 2006.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    L. Stojanovic, A. Maedche, B. Motik, and N. Stojanovic. User-driven ontology evolution management. In A. Gómez-Pérez and V. R. Benjamins, editors, Proc. of EKAW-2002, volume 2473 of LNCS, pages 285–300, Siguenza, Spain. Springer, Berlin, 2002.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    L. Stojanovic. Methods and Tools for Ontology Evolution. Ph.D. thesis, Universität Karlsruhe (TH), Universität Karlsruhe (TH), Institut AIFB, D-76128 Karlsruhe, 2004.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    M. C. Suárez-Figueroa, G. Aguado de Cea, C. Buil, K. Dellschaft, M. Fernández-López, A. García, A. Gómez-Pérez, G. Herrero, E. Montiel-Ponsoda, M. Sabou, B. Villazon-Terrazas, and Z. Yufei. Neon methodology for building contextualized ontology networks. Technical report, NeOn Deliverable D5.4.1, February 2008.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Y. Sure, M. Erdmann, J. Angele, S. Staab, R. Studer, and D. Wenke. OntoEdit: Collaborative ontology development for the semantic web. In I. Horrocks and J. A. Hendler, editors, Proc. of International Semantic Web Conference 2002, volume 2342 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS), pages 221–235, Sardinia, Italy, 2002. Springer, Berlin, 2002.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Y. Sure, S. Staab, and J. Angele. OntoEdit: Guiding ontology development by methodology and inferencing, volume 2519 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS), pages 1205–1222, University of California, Irvine, USA, 2002. Springer, Berlin, 2002.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Y. Sure and R. Studer. On-To-Knowledge Methodology – Final version. On-To-Knowledge deliverable 18, Institute AIFB, University of Karlsruhe, 2002.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    C. Tempich, E. Simperl, M. Luczak, H. S. Pinto, and R. Studer. Argumentation-based ontology engineering. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 22(6):52–59, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    M. Uschold and M. Grueninger. Ontologies: Principles, methods and applications. Knowledge Sharing and Review, 11(2), 1996.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    M. Uschold and M. King. Towards a methodology for building ontologies. In Workshop on Basic Ontological Issues in Knowledge Sharing, held in conjunction with IJCAI-95, Montreal, Canada, 1995.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    M. Uschold, M. King, S. Moralee, and Y. Zorgios. The enterprise ontology. Knowledge Engineering Review, 13(1):31–89, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.SAP ResearchCEC KarlsruheKarlsruheGermany
  2. 2.Research Group ISWebUniversity of Koblenz-LandauKoblenzGermany
  3. 3.Institute AIFBUniversity of Karlsruhe (TH) and FZI Research Center for Information TechnologyKarlsruheGermany

Personalised recommendations