Abstract
When reusing existing ontologies, preference might be given to those providing extensive subcategorization for the classes deemed important in the new ontology (focus classes). The reused set of categories may not only consist of named classes but also of some compound concept expressions that could be viewed as meaningful categories by human ontologist. We define the general notion of focused ontologistic categorization power; for the sake of tractable experiments we then choose a restricted concept expression language and map it to syntactic axiom patterns. The occurrence of the patterns has been verified in two ontology collections, and for a sample of pattern instances their ontologistic status has been assessed by different groups of users.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.
From now on simply ‘axiom pattern’, for simplicity.
- 4.
We denote these specific patterns using normal font, to differentiate with the superscript notation (\(p_i\)) of abstract symbols in Sect. 2.
- 5.
For simplicity we omit O in the formula; the identity of the ontology follows from the FC it contains. We also avoid the use of DL notation and express the OWL axioms using predicate URIs, to avoid collision with general math notation. The only reference to beyond-RDFS construct is the value restriction for p5.
- 6.
The restriction can also be inherited from a superclass or part of a complete definition, or can have the form of a value or self restriction or of a cardinality restriction that specializes the existential one; analogously for other \(prun_n\)’s below.
- 7.
- 8.
- 9.
- 10.
- 11.
More detail can be found, again, at http://owl.vse.cz:8080/EKAW2016/.
- 12.
The questionnaire was in Czech. Its English translation is available from the paper web page http://owl.vse.cz:8080/EKAW2016/.
- 13.
Most namespace prefixes used can be expanded using the prefix.cc service. Prefixes unlisted by this service follow: p-act=http://purl.org/procurement/public-contracts-activities#, p-aut=http://purl.org/procurement/public-contracts-authority-kinds#, p1=http://www.loc.gov/premis/rdf/v1, p1-sm=http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/preservation/storageMedium#, sigkdd=http://oaei.ontologymatching.org/2016/conference/data/sigkdd.owl.
- 14.
- 15.
This work has been published separately as a demo paper [10]. The demo paper only contains a minimalist informal explanation of the notions of FC, CE and OC; apart from that the content of the demo paper is disjoint with the current submission.
References
Dudáš, M., Hanzal, T., Svátek, V., Zamazal, O.: OBOWLMorph: starting ontology development from PURO background models. In: Tamma, V., Dragoni, M., Gonçalves, R., Ławrynowicz, A. (eds.) OWLED 2015. LNCS, vol. 9557, pp. 14–20. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-33245-1_2
García-Santa, N., Atemezing, G.A., Villazón-Terrazas, B.: The ProtégéLOV plugin: ontology access and reuse for everyone. In: Gandon, F., Guéret, C., Villata, S., Breslin, J., Faron-Zucker, C., Zimmermann, A. (eds.) ESWC 2015. LNCS, vol. 9341, pp. 41–45. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-25639-9_8
Giunchiglia, F., Zaihrayeu, I.: Lightweight ontologies. In: Liu, L., Tamer Özsu, M. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Database Systems, pp. 1613–1619. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Krisnadhi, A.A., Hitzler, P., Janowicz, K.: On the capabilities and limitations of OWL regarding typecasting and ontology design pattern views. In: Tamma, V., Dragoni, M., Gonçalves, R., Ławrynowicz, A. (eds.) OWLED 2015. LNCS, vol. 9557, pp. 105–116. Springer, Heidelberg (2016). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-33245-1_11
Matentzoglu, N., Bail, S., Parsia, B.: A snapshot of the OWL Web. In: Alani, H., et al. (eds.) ISWC 2013. LNCS, vol. 8218, pp. 331–346. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-41335-3_21
Schaible, J., Gottron, T., Scherp, A.: Survey on common strategies of vocabulary reuse in linked open data modeling. In: Presutti, V., d’Amato, C., Gandon, F., d’Aquin, M., Staab, S., Tordai, A. (eds.) ESWC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8465, pp. 457–472. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-07443-6_31
Svátek, V., Homola, M., Kluka, J., Vacura, M.: Metamodeling-based coherence checking of OWL vocabulary background models. In: OWLED 2013, Montpellier (2013)
Tempich, C., Volz, R.: Towards a benchmark for semantic Web reasoners - an analysis of the DAML ontology library. In: EON-2003 (2003)
Vandenbussche, P.-Y., Vatant, B.: Linked open vocabularies. ERCIM News, 21–22 (2014)
Zamazal, O., Svátek, V.: Ontology search by categorization power. In: Workshop SumPre 2016 at ESWC (2016)
Acknowledgment
Ondřej Zamazal has been supported by the CSF grant no. 14-14076P, “COSOL – Categorization of Ontologies in Support of Ontology Life Cycle”. Vojtěch Svátek has been supported by the the UEP IGA F4/28/2016 project.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 Springer International Publishing AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Svátek, V., Zamazal, O., Vacura, M. (2016). Categorization Power of Ontologies with Respect to Focus Classes. In: Blomqvist, E., Ciancarini, P., Poggi, F., Vitali, F. (eds) Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management. EKAW 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10024. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49004-5_41
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49004-5_41
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-49003-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-49004-5
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)