Abstract
The emergence in the last years of initiatives like the Linked Open Data (LOD) has led to a significant increase in the amount of structured semantic data on the Web. Central role to this development has been played by ontologies, as these enable the representation of real world domains in an explicit and formal way and, thus, the production of commonly understood and shareable semantic data. Nevertheless, the shareability and wider reuse of such data can be hampered by the existence of vagueness within it, as this makes the data’s meaning less explicit. With that in mind, in this paper we present and evaluate the Vagueness Ontology, a metaontology that enables the explicit identification and description of vague entities and their vagueness-related characteristics in ontologies. The rationale is that such descriptions, when accompanying vague ontologies, may narrow the possible interpretations that the latter’s vague elements may assume by its users.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
Available at http://linkedmdb.org.
- 2.
Available at http://dbpedia.org.
- 3.
Available at http://www.cyc.com/platform/opencyc.
- 4.
Available at http://www.ip-super.org.
- 5.
Available at http://lov.okfn.org/vocab/voaf/v2.1/index.html.
- 6.
Available at http://www.essepuntato.it/2013/10/vagueness.
- 7.
Available at http://www.essepuntato.it/samod.
- 8.
- 9.
- 10.
- 11.
Available at http://oeg-lia3.dia.fi.upm.es/oops/index-content.jsp.
- 12.
Available at http://esurv.org?u=vagueness-ontology.
- 13.
Available at http://www.essepuntato.it/2013/10/vagueness/evaluation.
- 14.
Even if confidence intervals of the SUS scores will be rather wide (e.g., in our experiment we obtained [56.06, 78.45]), the average SUS score will be surprisingly stable even with a small sample. As stated in [29] and summarised in his blog (see http://www.measuringusability.com/blog/10-things-SUS.php for more details), Sauro “did several computer simulations and showed that [...] the mean from a sample size of just 5 repeated 1000 times [...] was within 6 points of the true SUS score” in the 50 % of the 1000 samples used – note that the true SUS score was calculated using the original big sample Sauro had available. This means that “you get within the ballpark of the actual SUS score in more than half of the cases with very small sample sizes” – e.g., “if the actual SUS score was a 74, average SUS scores from five users will fall between 68 and 80 half of the time”.
References
Alexopoulos, P., Pavlopoulos, J.: A vague sense classifier for detecting vague definitions in ontologies. In: Proceedings of the 14th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Short Papers, Gothenburg, Sweden, April 2014, vol. 2, pp. 33–37. Association for Computational Linguistics (2014)
Alexopoulos, P., Villazon-Terrazas, B., Pan, J.: Towards vagueness-aware semantic data. In: Bobillo, F., Carvalho, R.N., da Costa, P.C.G., d’Amato, C., Fanizzi, N., Laskey, K.B., Laskey, K.J., Lukasiewicz, T., Martin, T., Nickles, M., Pool, M. (eds.) URSW, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 1073, pp. 40–45. CEUR-WS.org (2013)
Bao, J., Tao, J., McGuinness, D.L., Smart, P.: Context representation for the semantic web. In: Web Science Conference, 26–27 April 2010 (2010)
Barabucci, G., Di Iorio, A., Peroni, S., Poggi, F., Vitali, F.: Annotations with EARMARK in practice: a fairy tale. In: Tomasi, F., Vitali, F., (eds.) Proceedings of the 2013 Workshop on Collaborative Annotations in Shared Environments: Metadata, Vocabularies and Techniques in the Digital Humanities (DH-CASE 2013). ACM Press (2013)
Benerecetti, M., Bouquet, P., Ghidini, C.: Contextual reasoning distilled. J. Exp. Theoret. Artif. Intell. 12(3), 279–305 (2000)
Bobillo, F., Straccia, U.: Fuzzy ontology representation using OWL 2. Int. J. Approximate Reasoning 52(7), 1073–1094 (2011)
Brooke, J.: SUS: a quick and dirty usability scale. In: Jordan, P.W., Thomas, B., Weerdmeester, B.A., McClelland, A.L. (eds.) Usability Evaluation in Industry, pp. 189–194. Taylor and Francis, London (1996)
Buitelaar, P., Sintek, M., Kiesel, M.: A multilingual/multimedia lexicon model for ontologies. In: Sure, Y., Domingue, J. (eds.) ESWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4011, pp. 502–513. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Casellas, N.: Ontology evaluation through usability measures. In: Meersman, R., Herrero, P., Dillon, T. (eds.) OTM 2009 Workshops. LNCS, vol. 5872, pp. 594–603. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Chandrasekaran, B., Josephson, J., Benjamins, R.: What are ontologies and why do we need them? IEEE Intell. Syst. 14(1), 20–26 (1999)
Falco, R., Gangemi, A., Peroni, S., Vitali, F.: Modeling OWL ontologies with Graffoo. In: Presutti, V., Blomqvist, E., Troncy, R., Sack, H., Papadakis, I., Tordai, A. (eds.) ESWC 2014 Satellite Events. LNCS, vol. 8798, pp. 320–325. Springer, Berlin (2014)
Gangemi, A., Lehmann, J., Presutti, V., Nissim, M., Catenacci, C.: C-ODO: an OWL meta-model for collaborative ontology design. In: Alani, H., Noy, N., Stumme, G., Mika, P., Sure, Y., Vrandecic, D. (eds.) Workshop on Social and Collaborative Construction of Structured Knowledge (CKC 2007) at WWW 2007, Banff, Canada (2007)
Hartmann, J., Sure, Y., Haase, P., Palma, R., del Carmen Suárez-Figueroa, M.: OMV - Ontology Metadata Vocabulary. In: Welty, C. (ed.) Ontology Patterns for the Semantic Web Workshop, Galway, Ireland (2005)
Hellmann, S., Lehmann, J., Auer, S., Brümmer, M.: Integrating NLP using linked data. In: Alani, H., Kagal, L., Fokoue, A., Groth, P., Biemann, C., Parreira, J.X., Aroyo, L., Noy, N., Welty, C., Janowicz, K. (eds.) ISWC 2013, Part II. LNCS, vol. 8219, pp. 98–113. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)
Horridge, M., Patel-Schneider, P.F.: OWL 2 Web Ontology Language: Manchester Syntax. W3C working group note, World Wide Web Consortium, 2nd edn., December 2012
Hyde, D.: Vagueness, Logic and Ontology. Ashgate New Critical Thinking in Philosophy. Ashgate, Aldershot (2008)
Kahan, J., Koivunen, M.-R.: Annotea: an open RDF infrastructure for shared web annotations. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW 2001), pp. 623–632. ACM Press, New York (2001)
Kotis, K., Vouros, A.: Human-centered ontology engineering: the HCOME methodology. Knowl. Inf. Syst. 10(1), 109–131 (2006)
Lebo, T., Sahoo, S., McGuinness, D.: PROV-O: The PROV Ontology. W3C recommendation, World Wide Web Consortium, April 2013
Lewis, J.R., Sauro, J.: The factor structure of the system usability scale. In: Kurosu, M. (ed.) HCD 2009. LNCS, vol. 5619, pp. 94–103. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
Lukasiewicz, T., Straccia, U.: Managing uncertainty and vagueness in description logics for the semantic web. J. Web Semant. 6(4), 291–308 (2008)
Montiel-Ponsoda, E., de Cea, G.A., Suarez-Figueroa, M., Palma, R., Peters, W., Gomez-Perez, A.: LexOMV: an OMV extension to capture multilinguality. In: Proceedings of the OntoLex07, pp. 118–127 (2007–06)
Noy, N.F., Chugh, A., Liu, W., Musen, M.A.: A framework for ontology evolution in collaborative environments. In: Cruz, I., Decker, S., Allemang, D., Preist, C., Schwabe, D., Mika, P., Uschold, M., Aroyo, L.M. (eds.) ISWC 2006. LNCS, vol. 4273, pp. 544–558. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Palma, R., Haase, P., Corcho, O., Gómez-Pérez, A.: Change representation for OWL 2 ontologies. In: Hoekstra, R., Patel-Schneider, P.F. (eds.) OWLED, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 529. CEUR-WS.org (2008)
Pan, J.Z., Stamou, G., Stoilos, G., Taylor, S., Thomas, E.: Scalable querying services over Fuzzy ontologies. In: The Proceedings of the 17th International World Wide Web Conference (WWW2008) (2008)
Poveda-Villalón, M., Suárez-Figueroa, M.C., Gómez-Pérez, A.: Validating ontologies with OOPS!. In: ten Teije, A., Völker, J., Handschuh, S., Stuckenschmidt, H., d’Acquin, M., Nikolov, A., Aussenac-Gilles, N., Hernandez, N. (eds.) EKAW 2012. LNCS, vol. 7603, pp. 267–281. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
Prud’hommeaux, E., Carothers, G.: Turtle - Terse RDF Triple Language. W3C candidate recommendation, World Wide Web Consortium, February 2013
Sanderson, R., Ciccarese, P., Van de Sompel, H.: Designing the W3C open annotation data model. In: Proceedings of the 5th Annual ACM Web Science Conference (WebSci13), pp. 366–375. ACM Press (2013)
Sauro, J.: A Practical Guide to the System Usability Scale: Background, Benchmarks & Best Practices. CreateSpace, Denver (2011)
Shapiro, S.: Vagueness in Context. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2006)
Stoilos, G., Stamou, G., Pan, J.Z., Tzouvaras, V., Horrocks, I.: Reasoning with very expressive Fuzzy description logics. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 30, 273–320 (2007)
Strauss, A., Corbin, J.: Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, 2nd edn. Sage Publications, London (1998)
Thomas, C., Sheth, A.: On the expressiveness of the languages for the semantic web - making a case for a ‘little more’. In: Sanchez, E. (ed.) Fuzzy Logic and the Semantic Web. Capturing Intelligence, vol. 1, pp. 3–20. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2006)
Vrandecic, D., Pinto, H.S., Sure, Y., Tempich, C.: The DILIGENT knowledge processes. J. Knowl. Manag. 9(5), 85–96 (2005)
Zadeh, L.A.: From search engines to question-answering systems - the need for new tools. In: Ruiz, E.M., Segovia, J., Szczepaniak, P.S. (eds.) AWIC 2003. LNAI, vol. 2663, pp. 15–17. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
Acknowledgments
The research has been funded from the People Programme (Marie Curie Actions) of the European Union’s 7th Framework Programme P7/2007-2013 under REA grant agreement \(n^o\) 286348. We also want to thank all the people who helped us with the evaluation of Vagueness Ontology.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Alexopoulos, P., Peroni, S., Villazón-Terrazas, B., Pan, J.Z., Gómez-Pérez, J.M. (2014). A Metaontology for Annotating Ontology Entities with Vagueness Descriptions. In: Bobillo, F., et al. Uncertainty Reasoning for the Semantic Web III. URSW URSW URSW 2012 2011 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 8816. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13413-0_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13413-0_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-13412-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-13413-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)