Advertisement

Quality Assurance in Collaboratively Created Web Vocabularies

  • Christian Mader
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7295)

Abstract

In recent years, controlled vocabularies have become available on the Web using SKOS, i.e. they are linked to each other in order to be used in an interoperable way. Well-crafted controlled vocabularies are beneficial for, e.g., search and retrieval systems that provide functionalities like search term completion, query expansion or the ability for inter-domain queries. Some of these vocabularies are created collaboratively by experts, holding expertise in different domains. In order to support vocabulary contributors to create high quality vocabularies, we propose a method that semi-automatically ensures vocabulary quality in collaborative authoring processes. The proposed approach tackles this issue by (i) defining a set of criteria that serve as a metrics to measure vocabulary quality and (ii) introducing a method to continually assess and improve this quality. As a result of our approach, the developed vocabularies are expected to better fit the intentions of the contributors and are more useful for reuse and adoption on the Web of Data.

Keywords

Link Data Control Vocabulary Query Expansion Quality Controller Simple Knowledge Organization System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Proceedings of ACM/IEEE 2003 Joint Conf. on Digital Libraries (JCDL 2003), Houston, Texas, USA, May 27-31. IEEE Computer Society (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Information and documentation – thesauri and interoperability with other vocabularies – part 1: Thesauri for information retrieval. Norm (Draft) ISO 25964-1, Int. Org. for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aitchison, J., Gilchrist, A., Bawden, D.: Thesaurus construction and use: a practical manual. Aslib IMI (2000)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    de Coronado, S., et al.: The nci thesaurus quality assurance life cycle. Jour. of Bio. Inf. 42(3), 530–539 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gangemi, A., Catenacci, C., Ciaramita, M., Lehmann, J.: Ontology evaluation and validation: an integrated formal model for the quality diagnostic task. Tech. rep., Lab. of Applied Ontologies – CNR, Rome, Italy (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Heath, T., Bizer, C.: Linked Data: Evolving the Web into a Global Data Space, 1st edn. Morgan & Claypool (2011), http://linkeddatabook.com/
  7. 7.
    Hedden, H.: The accidental taxonomist. Information Today (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kless, D., Milton, S.: Towards Quality Measures for Evaluating Thesauri. In: Sánchez-Alonso, S., Athanasiadis, I.N. (eds.) MTSR 2010. CCIS, vol. 108, pp. 312–319. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nagy, H., Pellegrini, T., Mader, C.: Exploring structural differences in thesauri for skos-based applications. In: I-Semantics 2011, pp. 187–190. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    NISO: ANSI/NISO Z39.19 - Guidelines for the Construction, Format, and Management of Monolingual Controlled Vocabularies (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tartir, S., Arpinar, I.B.: Ontology evaluation and ranking using ontoqa. In: ICSC 2007, pp. 185–192 (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christian Mader
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Computer ScienceUniversity of ViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations