Giancarlo Guizzardi

Bio: Giancarlo Guizzardi is an academic researcher from Free University of Bozen-Bolzano. The author has contributed to research in topics: Ontology (information science) & Ontology. The author has an hindex of 40, co-authored 291 publications receiving 6900 citations. Previous affiliations of Giancarlo Guizzardi include Polytechnic University of Catalonia & Information Technology University.

Ontological foundations for structural conceptual models

Abstract: In this thesis, we aim at contributing to the theory of conceptual modeling and ontology representation. Our main objective here is to provide ontological foundations for the most fundamental concepts in conceptual modeling. These foundations comprise a number of ontological theories, which are built on established work on philosophical ontology, cognitive psychology, philosophy of language and linguistics. Together these theories amount to a system of categories and formal relations known as a foundational ontology

On Ontology, ontologies, Conceptualizations, Modeling Languages, and (Meta)Models

Abstract: In philosophy, the term ontology has been used since the 17th century to refer both to a philosophical discipline (Ontology with a capital “O”), and as a domain-independent system of categories that can be used in the conceptualization of domain-specific scientific theories. In the past decades there has been a growing interest in the subject of ontology in computer and information sciences. In the last few years, this interest has expanded considerably in the context of the Semantic Web and MDA (Model-Driven Architecture) research efforts, and due to the role ontologies are perceived to play in these initiatives. In this paper, we explore the relations between Ontology and ontologies in the philosophical sense with domain ontologies in computer science. Moreover, we elaborate on formal characterizations for the notions of ontology, conceptualization and metamodel, as well as on the relations between these notions. Additionally, we discuss a set of criteria that a modeling language should meet in order to be considered a suitable language to model phenomena in a given domain, and present a systematic framework for language evaluation and design. Furthermore, we argue for the importance of ontology in both philosophical senses aforementioned for designing and evaluating a suitable general ontology representation language, and we address the question whether the so-called Ontology Web languages can be considered as suitable general ontology representation languages. Finally, we motivate the need for two complementary classes of modeling languages in Ontology Engineering addressing two separate sets of concerns.

Grounding Software Domain Ontologies in the Unified Foundational Ontology (UFO): The case of the ODE Software Process Ontology.

Abstract: Foundational Ontologies are theoretically well-founded domainindependent systems of categories that have been successfully used to improve the quality of conceptual modeling languages and models. In this paper, we present the latest developments in the UFO ontology. Moreover, we elaborate on the relevance of these foundational ontologies in the development of domain ontologies by showing a case study in the software process domain.

Towards ontological foundations for conceptual modeling: The unified foundational ontology (UFO) story

Abstract: This paper describes a long-term research program on developing ontological foundations for conceptual modeling. This program, organized around the theoretical background of the foundational ontology UFO (Unified Foundational Ontol- ogy), aims at developing theories, methodologies and engineering tools with the goal of advancing conceptual modeling as a theoretically sound discipline but also one that has concrete and measurable practical implications. The paper describes the historical context in which UFO was conceived, briefly discusses its stratified organization, and reports on a number of applica- tions of this foundational ontology over more than a decade. In particular, it discusses the most successful application of UFO, namely, the development of the conceptual modeling language OntoUML. The paper also discusses a number of methodological and computational tools, which have been developed over the years to support the OntoUML community. Examples of these methodological tools include ontological patterns and anti-patterns; examples of these computational tools include automated support for pattern-based model construction, formal model verification, formal model validation via visual simulation, model verbalization, code generation and anti-pattern detection and rectification. In addition, the paper reports on a variety of appli- cations in which the language as well as its associated tools have been employed to engineer models in several institutional contexts and domains. Finally, it reflects on some of these lessons learned by observing how OntoUML has been actually used in practice by its community and on how these have influenced both the evolution of the language as well as the advancement of some of the core ontological notions in UFO.

An ontological approach to domain engineering

Abstract: Domain engineering aims to support systematic reuse, focusing on modeling common knowledge in a problem domain. Ontologies have also been pointed as holding great promise for software reuse. In this paper, we present ODE (Ontology-based Domain Engineering), an ontological approach for domain engineering that aims to join ontologies and object-oriented technology.

Ontology Matching

Abstract: Ontologies tend to be found everywhere. They are viewed as the silver bullet for many applications, such as database integration, peer-to-peer systems, e-commerce, semantic web services, or social networks. However, in open or evolving systems, such as the semantic web, different parties would, in general, adopt different ontologies. Thus, merely using ontologies, like using XML, does not reduce heterogeneity: it just raises heterogeneity problems to a higher level. Euzenat and Shvaikos book is devoted to ontology matching as a solution to the semantic heterogeneity problem faced by computer systems. Ontology matching aims at finding correspondences between semantically related entities of different ontologies. These correspondences may stand for equivalence as well as other relations, such as consequence, subsumption, or disjointness, between ontology entities. Many different matching solutions have been proposed so far from various viewpoints, e.g., databases, information systems, and artificial intelligence. The second edition of Ontology Matching has been thoroughly revised and updated to reflect the most recent advances in this quickly developing area, which resulted in more than 150 pages of new content. In particular, the book includes a new chapter dedicated to the methodology for performing ontology matching. It also covers emerging topics, such as data interlinking, ontology partitioning and pruning, context-based matching, matcher tuning, alignment debugging, and user involvement in matching, to mention a few. More than 100 state-of-the-art matching systems and frameworks were reviewed. With Ontology Matching, researchers and practitioners will find a reference book that presents currently available work in a uniform framework. In particular, the work and the techniques presented in this book can be equally applied to database schema matching, catalog integration, XML schema matching and other related problems. The objectives of the book include presenting (i) the state of the art and (ii) the latest research results in ontology matching by providing a systematic and detailed account of matching techniques and matching systems from theoretical, practical and application perspectives.

Taking Rights Seriously

Abstract: 1.. HARD CASES 5. Legal Rights A. Legislation . . . We might therefore do well to consider how a philosophical judge might develop, in appropriate cases, theories of what legislative purpose and legal principles require. We shall find that he would construct these theories in the same manner as a philosophical referee would construct the character of a game. I have invented, for this purpose, a lawyer of superhuman skill, learning, patience and acumen, whom I shall call Hercules. I suppose that Hercules is a judge in some representative American jurisdiction. I assume that he accepts the main uncontroversial constitutive and regulative rules of the law in his jurisdiction. He accepts, that is, that statutes have the general power to create and extinguish legal rights, and that judges have the general duty to follow earlier decisions of their court or higher courts whose rationale, as l

Situations and Attitudes.

Abstract: In this provocative book, Barwise and Perry tackle the slippery subject of \"meaning, \" a subject that has long vexed linguists, language philosophers, and logicians.