Completing and Debugging Ontologies: state of the art and challenges

As semantically-enabled applications require high-quality ontologies, developing and maintaining ontologies that are as correct and complete as possible is an important although difficult task in ontology engineering. A key step is ontology debugging and completion. In general, there are two steps: detecting defects and repairing defects. In this paper we discuss the state of the art regarding the repairing step. We do this by formalizing the repairing step as an abduction problem and situating the state of the art with respect to this framework. We show that there are still many open research problems and show opportunities for further work and advancing the field.Comment: 56 page

Debugging Ontology Mappings: A Static Approach

Ontology mapping is the bottleneck in solving interoperation between Semantic Web applications using heterogeneous ontologies. Many mapping methods have been proposed in recent years, but in practice, it is still difficult to obtain satisfactory mapping results having high precision and recall. Different from existing methods, which focus on finding efficient and effective solutions for the ontology mapping problem, we place emphasis on analyzing the mapping result to detect/diagnose the mapping defects. In this paper, a novel technique called debugging ontology mappings is presented. During debugging, some types of mapping errors, such as redundant and inconsistent mappings, can be detected. Some warnings, including imprecise mappings or abnormal mappings, are also locked by analyzing the features of mapping result. More importantly, some errors and warnings can be repaired automatically or can be presented to users with revising suggestions. The experimental results reveal that the ontology debugging technique is promising, and it can improve the quality of mapping result

Get my pizza right: Repairing missing is-a relations in ALC ontologies (extended version)

With the increased use of ontologies in semantically-enabled applications, the issue of debugging defects in ontologies has become increasingly important. These defects can lead to wrong or incomplete results for the applications. Debugging consists of the phases of detection and repairing. In this paper we focus on the repairing phase of a particular kind of defects, i.e. the missing relations in the is-a hierarchy. Previous work has dealt with the case of taxonomies. In this work we extend the scope to deal with ALC ontologies that can be represented using acyclic terminologies. We present algorithms and discuss a system

Inconsistent ontology diagnosis: framework and prototype

Deliverable D3.6.1(WP3.6)In this document, we present a framework for inconsistent ontology diagnosis and repair by defining a number of new non-standard reasoning services to explain inconsistencies through pinpointing. We developed two different types of algorithms for the framework, and we describe these algorithms in some detail. Both algorithms have been prototypically implemented as the DION (Debugger of Inconsistent ONtologies) and MUPStersystem. The first implements a bottom-up approach to calculate pinpoints by the support of an external DL reasoner, the second using a specialised tableau-based calculus

Handling inconsistency on ontologies through a generalized dynamic argumentation framework

In this article we present a generalized dynamic argumentation framework that handles arguments expressed in an abstract language assumed to be some first order logic fragment. Once the formalism is presented, we propose a reification to the description logic ALC with the intention to handle ontology debugging. In this sense, since argumentation frameworks reason over graphs that relate arguments through attack, our methodology is proposed to bridge ontological inconsistency sources to attack relations in argumentation. Finally, an argumentation semantics is proposed as a consistency restoration tool to cope with the ontology debugging.Workshop de Agentes y Sistemas Inteligentes (WASI)Red de Universidades con Carreras en Informática (RedUNCI

Detecting and Correcting Conservativity Principle Violations in Ontology-to-Ontology Mappings

In order to enable interoperability between ontology-based systems, ontology matching techniques have been proposed. However, when the generated mappings suffer from logical flaws, their usefulness may be diminished. In this paper we present an approximate method to detect and correct violations to the so-called conservativity principle where novel subsumption entailments between named concepts in one of the input ontologies are considered as unwanted. We show that this is indeed the case in our application domain based on the EU Optique project. Additionally, our extensive evaluation conducted with both the Optique use case and the data sets from the Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative (OAEI) suggests that our method is both useful and feasible in practice.Copyright 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland. The final publication is available at http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-3-319-11915-1_

Handling inconsistency on ontologies through a generalized dynamic argumentation framework

In this article we present a generalized dynamic argumentation framework that handles arguments expressed in an abstract language assumed to be some first order logic fragment. Once the formalism is presented, we propose a reification to the description logic ALC with the intention to handle ontology debugging. In this sense, since argumentation frameworks reason over graphs that relate arguments through attack, our methodology is proposed to bridge ontological inconsistency sources to attack relations in argumentation. Finally, an argumentation semantics is proposed as a consistency restoration tool to cope with the ontology debugging.Workshop de Agentes y Sistemas Inteligentes (WASI)Red de Universidades con Carreras en Informática (RedUNCI