48 research outputs found

    SPARQL-DL queries for antipattern detection

    Full text link
    Ontology antipatterns are structures that reflect ontology modelling problems, they lead to inconsistencies, bad reasoning performance or bad formalisation of domain knowledge. Antipatterns normally appear in ontologies developed by those who are not experts in ontology engineering. Based on our experience in ontology design, we have created a catalogue of such antipatterns in the past, and in this paper we describe how we can use SPARQL-DL to detect them. We conduct some experiments to detect them in a large OWL ontology corpus obtained from the Watson ontology search portal. Our results show that each antipattern needs a specialised detection method

    OnlynessIsLoneliness (OIL)

    Get PDF
    Our work is based on the debugging process of real ontologies that have been developed by domain experts, who are not necessarily too familiar with DL, and hence can misuse DL constructors and misunderstand the semantics of some OWL expressions, leading to unwanted unsatisfiable classes. Our patterns were first found during the debugging process of a medium-sized OWL ontology (165 classes) developed by a domain expert in the area of hydrology [9]. The first version of this ontology had a total of 114 unsatisfiable classes. The information provided by the debugging systems used ([3], [5]) on (root) unsatisfiable classes was not easily understandable by domain experts to find the reasons for their unsatisfiability. And in several occasions during the debugging process the generation of justifications for unsatisfiability took several hours, what made these tools hard to use, confirming the results described in [8]. Using this debugging process and several other real ontologies debugging one, we found out that in several occasions domain experts were just changing axioms from the original ontology in a somehow random manner, even changing the intended meaning of the definitions instead of correcting errors in their formalisatio

    SPARQL-based Detection of Antipatterns in OWL Ontologies

    Get PDF
    Ontology anti-patterns are structures that reflect ontology modeling problems because they lead to inconsistencies or to bad reasoning performance. Based on a collection of anti-patterns coming from our experience in ontology engineering projects and bad modeling practices found in the literature, we propose to represent them as SPARQL queries and conduct an experiment to detect them in an ontology corpus obtained from the Watson ontology search portal

    The Current Landscape of Pitfalls in Ontologies

    Get PDF
    A growing number of ontologies are already available thanks to development initiatives in many different fields. In such ontology developments, developers must tackle a wide range of difficulties and handicaps, which can result in the appearance of anomalies in the resulting ontologies. Therefore, ontology evaluation plays a key role in ontology development projects. OOPS! is an on-line tool that automatically detects pitfalls, considered as potential errors or problems, and thus may help ontology developers to improve their ontologies. To gain insight in the existence of pitfalls and to assess whether there are differences among ontologies developed by novices, a random set of already scanned ontologies, and existing well-known ones, data of 406 OWL ontologies were analysed on OOPS!’s 21 pitfalls, of which 24 ontologies were also examined manually on the detected pitfalls. The various analyses performed show only minor differences between the three sets of ontologies, therewith providing a general landscape of pitfalls in ontologies

    Insights from an OTTR-centric Ontology Engineering Methodology

    Full text link
    OTTR is a language for representing ontology modeling patterns, which enables to build ontologies or knowledge bases by instantiating templates. Thereby, particularities of the ontological representation language are hidden from the domain experts, and it enables ontology engineers to, to some extent, separate the processes of deciding about what information to model from deciding about how to model the information, e.g., which design patterns to use. Certain decisions can thus be postponed for the benefit of focusing on one of these processes. To date, only few works on ontology engineering where ontology templates are applied are described in the literature. In this paper, we outline our methodology and report findings from our ontology engineering activities in the domain of Material Science. In these activities, OTTR templates play a key role. Our ontology engineering process is bottom-up, as we begin modeling activities from existing data that is then, via templates, fed into a knowledge graph, and it is top-down, as we first focus on which data to model and postpone the decision of how to model the data. We find, among other things, that OTTR templates are especially useful as a means of communication with domain experts. Furthermore, we find that because OTTR templates encapsulate modeling decisions, the engineering process becomes flexible, meaning that design decisions can be changed at little cost.Comment: Paper accepted at the 14th Workshop on Ontology Design and Patterns (WOP 2023

    Persuasive Explanation of Reasoning Inferences on Dietary Data

    Get PDF
    Explainable AI aims at building intelligent systems that are able to provide a clear, and human understandable, justification of their decisions. This holds for both rule-based and data-driven methods. In management of chronic diseases, the users of such systems are patients that follow strict dietary rules to manage such diseases. After receiving the input of the intake food, the system performs reasoning to understand whether the users follow an unhealthy behaviour. Successively, the system has to communicate the results in a clear and effective way, that is, the output message has to persuade users to follow the right dietary rules. In this paper, we address the main challenges to build such systems: i) the natural language generation of messages that explain the reasoner inconsistency; ii) the effectiveness of such messages at persuading the users. Results prove that the persuasive explanations are able to reduce the unhealthy users’ behaviours

    On Expert Behaviors and Question Types for Efficient Query-Based Ontology Fault Localization

    Full text link
    We challenge existing query-based ontology fault localization methods wrt. assumptions they make, criteria they optimize, and interaction means they use. We find that their efficiency depends largely on the behavior of the interacting expert, that performed calculations can be inefficient or imprecise, and that used optimization criteria are often not fully realistic. As a remedy, we suggest a novel (and simpler) interaction approach which overcomes all identified problems and, in comprehensive experiments on faulty real-world ontologies, enables a successful fault localization while requiring fewer expert interactions in 66 % of the cases, and always at least 80 % less expert waiting time, compared to existing methods

    Pitfalls in Ontologies and TIPS to Prevent Them

    Get PDF
    Abstract. A growing number of ontologies are already available thanks to development initiatives in many different fields. In such ontology developments, developers must tackle a wide range of difficulties and handicaps, which can result in the appearance of anomalies in the resulting ontologies. Therefore, ontology evaluation plays a key role in ontology development. OOPS! is an on-line tool that automatically detects pitfalls, considered as potential errors or problems-and thus may help ontology developers to improve their ontologies. To gain insight in the existence of pitfalls and to assess whether there are differences among ontologies developed by novices, a random set of already scanned ontologies, and existing well-known ones, data of 406 OWL ontologies were analysed on OOPS!'s 21 pitfalls, of which 24 ontologies were also examined manually on the detected pitfalls. The various analyses performed show only minor differences between the three sets of ontologies, therewith providing a general landscape of pitfalls in ontologies. We also propose guidelines to avoid the inclusion of such common pitfalls in new ontologies, the Typical pItfalls Prevention Scheme (TIPS), so as to increase the baseline quality of OWL ontologies
    corecore