Advances in architectural, engineering and construction informatics

Hartmann, T.

doi:10.1016/j.aei.2012.05.002

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Construction informatics [1,2] have grown in appeal in the highly structured knowledge datasets for the architecture, engineering, construction, owner-operator (AECOO) domain because the built environment has several knowledge-intensive subdomains, namely: technical plans, quantity take-off, construction contracts, construction safety, data exchange, and linked data [3][4][5][6][7][8]. The digitalization of the (to-be and as-is) built environment, as enabled by building information modelling (BIM) [9,10], sets the foundation for research and applications of knowledge engineering on the growing number of BIM models for existing buildings.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Framework for the Evaluation of the Cultural Heritage Information Ontology

Tibaut

Oliveira

2022

Applied Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The intelligent management of built cultural heritage, including heritage buildings, requires common semantics in the form of standardized ontologies to achieve semantic interoperability. Foundational ontologies should be reused when building new ontologies, as they provide high-level terms; however, candidate foundational ontologies should be evaluated for quality and pitfalls. Simple metrics (e.g., number of concepts) are easy to obtain with existing tools. Complex metrics such as quality of ontology structure, functional adequacy, transferability, reliability, compatibility, maintainability, and operability, are defined in recent ontology evaluation frameworks; however, these do not evaluate interoperability features. The paper proposes an improved framework for an automated ontology evaluation based on the OQuaRE framework. Our approach improved some of the metrics of the OQuaRE framework and introduced three metrics for assessing the interoperability of the ontology in question (Externes, Composability, and Aggregability). In the experimental section, the framework is validated in an evaluation of cultural heritage information ontology (CIDOC CRM—ISO 12217:2014) with the use of new software for ontology evaluation. The detailed results reveal that the ontology is minimally acceptable and that the improved evaluation framework efficiently integrated interoperability metrics. Recommendations for the improvement of the cultural heritage information ontology are described in the Discussion and Conclusions section.

show abstract