Abstract

Rudify is a set of tools used for automatically annotating concepts in an ontology with the ontological meta-properties employed by OntoClean [1]. While OntoClean provides a methodology for evaluating ontological hierarchies based on ontological meta-properties of the concepts in the hierarchy, it does not provide a method for determining the meta-properties of a given concept within an ontology. Rudify has been developed to help bridge this gap, and has been used in the KYOTO project to facilitate ontology development. The general idea behind Rudify is the assumption that a preferred set of linguistic expressions is used when talking about ontological meta-properties. Thus, one can deduce a concept’s meta-properties from the usage of the concept’s lexical representation (LR) in natural language. This paper describes the theory behind Rudify, the development of Rudify, and evaluates Rudify’s output for the rigidity of base concepts in English, Dutch, and Spanish. Our overall conclusion is that the decisive output for English is useable data, while the procedure currently exploited by Rudify does not easily carry over to Spanish and Dutch.

Keywords

Ontology Ontology evaluation Rigidity Essence Base concept Wordnet KYOTO 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Guarino, N., Welty, C.: An Overview of OntoClean. In: Staab, S., Studer, R. (eds.) Handbook on Ontologies, pp. 151–172. Springer, Berlin (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gangemi, A., Guarino, N., Masolo, C., Oltramari, A.: Sweetening WordNet with Dolce. AI Magazine 24(3), 13–24 (2003)MATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Guarino, N., Welty, C.: Evaluating Ontological Decisions with OntoClean. Communications of the ACM 45(2), 61–65 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Welty, C., Guarino, N.: Supporting Ontological Analysis of Taxonomic Relationships. Data and Knowledge Engineering 39(1), 51–74 (2001)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fellbaum, C. (ed.): WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database. MIT Press, Cambridge (1998)MATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rosch, E., Mervis, C.B., Gray, W.D., Johnson, D.M., Boyes-Braem, P.: Basic Objects in Natural Categories. Cognitve Psychology 8, 382–439 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tanaka, J.W., Taylor, M.: Object Categories and Expertise: Is the Basic Level in the Eye of the Beholder? Cognitve Psychology 23, 457–482 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Izquierdo, R., Suárez, A., Rigau, G.: Exploring the Automatic Selection of Basic Level Concepts. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Recent Advances on Natural Language Processing (RANLP 2007) (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kilgarriff, A.: Googleology is Bad Science. Computational Linguistics 33, 147–151 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Völker, J., Vrandecic, D., Sure, Y.: Automatic Evaluation of Ontologies (AEON). In: Gil, Y., Motta, E., Benjamins, V.R., Musen, M.A. (eds.) ISWC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3729, pp. 716–731. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Völker, J., Vrandecic, D., Sure, Y., Hotho, A.: AEON – An Approach to the Automatic Evaluation of Ontologies. Applied Ontology 3(1-2), 41–62 (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Witten, I.H., Frank, E.: Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and Techniques, 2nd edn. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2005)MATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bird, S., Klein, E., Loper, E.: Natural Language Processing with Python. O’Reilly, Sebastopol (2009)MATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Vossen, P., Agirre, E., Calzolari, N., Fellbaum, C., Hsieh, S., Huang, C., Isahara, H., Kanzaki, K., Marchetti, A., Monachini, M., Neri, F., Raffaelli, R., Rigau, G., Tesconi, M.: KYOTO: A System for Mining, Structuring and Distributing Knowledge Across Languages and Cultures. In: Proceedings of LREC 2008 (2008)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Herold, A., Hicks, A., Rigau, G.: Central Ontology Version 1. Deliverable D6.2, KYOTO Project (2009)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Herold, A., Hicks, A., Segers, R., Vossen, P., Rigau, G., Agirre, E., Laparra, E., Monachini, M., Toral, A., Soria, C.: Wordnets Mapped to Central Ontology Version 1. Deliverable D6.3, KYOTO Project (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Amanda Hicks
    • 1
  • Axel Herold
    • 2
  1. 1.University at BuffaloBuffaloU.S.A.
  2. 2.Berlin-Brandenburgische Akademie der WissenschaftenBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations