Using background knowledge for ontology evolution

One of the current bottlenecks for automating ontology evolution is resolving the right links between newly arising information and the existing knowledge in the ontology. Most of existing approaches mainly rely on the user when it comes to capturing and representing new knowledge. Our ontology evolution framework intends to reduce or even eliminate user input through the use of background knowledge. In this paper, we show how various sources of background knowledge could be exploited for relation discovery. We perform a relation discovery experiment focusing on the use of WordNet and Semantic Web ontologies as sources of background knowledge. We back our experiment with a thorough analysis that highlights various issues on how to improve and validate relation discovery in the future, which will directly improve the task of automatically performing ontology changes during evolution

Interpreting and using CPDAGs with background knowledge

We develop terminology and methods for working with maximally oriented partially directed acyclic graphs (maximal PDAGs). Maximal PDAGs arise from imposing restrictions on a Markov equivalence class of directed acyclic graphs, or equivalently on its graphical representation as a completed partially directed acyclic graph (CPDAG), for example when adding background knowledge about certain edge orientations. Although maximal PDAGs often arise in practice, causal methods have been mostly developed for CPDAGs. In this paper, we extend such methodology to maximal PDAGs. In particular, we develop methodology to read off possible ancestral relationships, we introduce a graphical criterion for covariate adjustment to estimate total causal effects, and we adapt the IDA and joint-IDA frameworks to estimate multi-sets of possible causal effects. We also present a simulation study that illustrates the gain in identifiability of total causal effects as the background knowledge increases. All methods are implemented in the R package pcalg.Comment: 17 pages, 6 figures, UAI 201

Substructure Discovery Using Minimum Description Length and Background Knowledge

The ability to identify interesting and repetitive substructures is an essential component to discovering knowledge in structural data. We describe a new version of our SUBDUE substructure discovery system based on the minimum description length principle. The SUBDUE system discovers substructures that compress the original data and represent structural concepts in the data. By replacing previously-discovered substructures in the data, multiple passes of SUBDUE produce a hierarchical description of the structural regularities in the data. SUBDUE uses a computationally-bounded inexact graph match that identifies similar, but not identical, instances of a substructure and finds an approximate measure of closeness of two substructures when under computational constraints. In addition to the minimum description length principle, other background knowledge can be used by SUBDUE to guide the search towards more appropriate substructures. Experiments in a variety of domains demonstrate SUBDUE's ability to find substructures capable of compressing the original data and to discover structural concepts important to the domain. Description of Online Appendix: This is a compressed tar file containing the SUBDUE discovery system, written in C. The program accepts as input databases represented in graph form, and will output discovered substructures with their corresponding value.Comment: See http://www.jair.org/ for an online appendix and other files accompanying this articl

Manipulationism, Ceteris Paribus Laws, and the Bugbear of Background Knowledge

According to manipulationist accounts of causal explanation, to explain an event is to show how it could be changed by intervening on its cause. The relevant change must be a ‘serious possibility’ claims Woodward 2003, distinct from mere logical or physical possibility—approximating something I call ‘scientific possibility’. This idea creates significant difficulties: background knowledge is necessary for judgments of possibili-ty. Yet the primary vehicles of explanation in manipulationism are ‘invariant’ generali-sations, and these are not well adapted to encoding such knowledge, especially in the social sciences, as some of it is non-causal. Ceteris paribus (CP) laws or generalisa-tions labour under no such difficulty. A survey of research methods such as case and comparative studies, randomised control trials, ethnography, and structural equation modeling, suggests that it would be more difficult and in some instances impossible to try to represent the output of each method in invariant generalisations; and that this is because in each method causal and non-causal background knowledge mesh in a way that cannot easily be accounted for in manipulationist terms. Ceteris paribus-generalisations being superior in this regard, a theory of explanation based on the latter is a better fit for social science

Topic and background knowledge effects on performance in speaking assessment

This study explores the extent to which topic and background knowledge of topic affect spoken performance in a high-stakes speaking test. It is argued that evidence of a substantial influence may introduce construct-irrelevant variance and undermine test fairness. Data were collected from 81 non-native speakers of English who performed on 10 topics across three task types. Background knowledge and general language proficiency were measured using self-report questionnaires and C-tests respectively. Score data were analysed using many-facet Rasch measurement and multiple regression. Findings showed that for two of the three task types, the topics used in the study generally exhibited difficulty measures which were statistically distinct. However, the size of the differences in topic difficulties was too small to have a large practical effect on scores. Participants’ different levels of background knowledge were shown to have a systematic effect on performance. However, these statistically significant differences also failed to translate into practical significance. Findings hold implications for speaking performance assessment