Methodological guidelines for reusing general ontologies

Abstract

Currently, there is a great deal of well-founded explicit knowledge formalizing general notions, such as time concepts and the part_of relation. Yet, it is often the case that instead of reusing ontologies that implement such notions (the so-called general ontologies), engineers create procedural programs that implicitly implement this knowledge. They do not save time and code by reusing explicit knowledge, and devote effort to solve problems that other people have already adequately solved. Consequently, we have developed a methodology that helps engineers to: (a) identify the type of general ontology to be reused; (b) find out which axioms and definitions should be reused; (c) make a decision, using formal concept analysis, on what general ontology is going to be reused; and (d) adapt and integrate the selected general ontology in the domain ontology to be developed. To illustrate our approach we have employed use-cases. For each use case, we provide a set of heuristics with examples. Each of these heuristics has been tested in either OWL or Prolog. Our methodology has been applied to develop a pharmaceutical product ontology. Additionally, we have carried out a controlled experiment with graduated students doing a MCs in Artificial Intelligence. This experiment has yielded some interesting findings concerning what kind of features the future extensions of the methodology should have.

[Retracted] Analysis of Intelligent Translation Systems and Evaluation Systems for Business English

“…e time responsiveness of the English translation teaching platform was further tested, and the results were obtained as shown in Figure 5. Analysis of Figure 6 shows that this paper's approach to the design of a business English literature translation teaching platform has a low time overhead in English translation [24].…”

Improving the Competency of First-Order Ontologies

“…(=> (8) (and (instance ?STRUCTURE AnimalAnatomicalStructure) (properPart ?STRUCTURE ?ANIMAL)) (instance ?ANIMAL Animal)) Adimen-SUMO v2.4 entails "Tables do not have a brain" by means of replacing the old axiom (7) with (8).…”

A Framework for the Evaluation of SUMO-Based Ontologies Using WordNet

“…That is, the competency of an ontology is measured by means of a set of goals or conjectures that are expected to be answered according to its requirements. The process of obtaining CQs is not automatic but creative [26]. Depending on the size and complexity of the ontology, creating a suitable set of CQs is by itself a very challenging and costly task.…”