A translation approach to portable ontology specifications

‘The Production of Space’, in: Frans Jacobi, Imagine, Space Poetry, Copenhagen, 1996, unpaginated.

The Production of Space

Recent work in Artificial Intelligence is exploring the use of formal ontologies as a way of specifying content-specific agreements for the sharing and reuse of knowledge among software entities. We take an engineering perspective on the development of such ontologies. Formal ontologies are viewed as designed artifacts, formulated for specific purposes and evaluated against objective design criteria. We describe the role of ontologies in supporting knowledge sharing activities, and then present a set of criteria to guide the development of ontologies for these purposes. We show how these criteria are applied in case studies from the design of ontologies for engineering mathematics and bibliographic data. Selected design decisions are discussed, and alternative representation choices and evaluated against the design criteria.

/pdf/toward-principles-for-the-design-of-ontologies-used-for-1laaojmx6x.pdf

Toward principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing

物件導向軟體之架構(Object-Oriented Software Construction)探討

This paper is intended to serve as a comprehensive introduction to the emerging field concerned with the design and use of ontologies. We observe that disparate backgrounds, languages, tools and techniques are a major barrier to effective communication among people, organisations and/or software understanding (i.e. an “ontology”) in a given subject area, can improve such communication, which in turn, can give rise to greater reuse and sharing, inter-operability, and more reliable software. After motivating their need, we clarify just what ontologies are and what purpose they serve. We outline a methodology for developing and evaluating ontologies, first discussing informal techniques, concerning such issues as scoping, handling ambiguity, reaching agreement and producing definitions. We then consider the benefits and describe, a more formal approach. We re-visit the scoping phase, and discuss the role of formal languages and techniques in the specification, implementation and evalution of ontologies. Finally, we review the state of the art and practice in this emerging field, considering various case studies, software tools for ontology development, key research issues and future prospects.

/pdf/ontologies-principles-methods-and-applications-13omx3se4e.pdf

Ontologies: principles, methods and applications

The word “ontology” is used with different senses in different communities The most radical difference is perhaps between the philosophical sense, which has of course a well-established tradition, and the computational sense, which emerged in the recent years in the knowledge engineering community, starting from an early informal definition of (computational) ontologies as “explicit specifications of conceptualizations” In this paper we shall revisit the previous attempts to clarify and formalize such original definition, providing a detailed account of the notions of conceptualization and explicit specification, while discussing at the same time the importance of shared explicit specifications

What Is an Ontology

The purpose of this paper is to defend the systematic introduction of formal ontological principles in the current practice of knowledge engineering, to explore the various relationships between ontology and knowledge representation, and to present the recent trends in this promising research area. According to the "modelling view" of knowledge acquisition proposed by Clancey, the modelling activity must establish a correspondence between a knowledge base and two separate subsystems: the agent's behaviour (i.e. the problem-solving expertise ) and its own environment (the problem domain ). Current knowledge modelling methodologies tend to focus on the former sub-system only, viewing domain knowledge as strongly dependent on the particular task at hand: in fact, AI researchers seem to have been much more interested in the nature of reasoning rather than in the nature of the real world. Recently, however, the potential value of task-independent knowledge bases (or "ontologies") suitable to large scale integration has been underlined in many ways. In this paper, we compare the dichotomy between reasoning and representation to the philosophical distinction between epistemology and ontology. We introduce the notion of the ontological level, intermediate between the epistemological and the conceptual levels discussed by Brachman, as a way to characterize a knowledge representation formalism taking into account the intended meaning of its primitives. We then discuss some formal ontologic distinctions which may play an important role for such purpose.

/pdf/formal-ontology-conceptual-analysis-and-knowledge-1dtvqbnbdc.pdf

Formal ontology, conceptual analysis and knowledge representation

In this paper we introduce the DOLCE upper level ontology, the first module of a Foundational Ontologies Library being developed within the WonderWeb project. DOLCE is presented here in an intuitive way; the reader should refer to the project deliverable for a detailed axiomatization. A comparison with WordNet's top-level taxonomy of nouns is also provided, which shows how DOLCE, used in addition to the OntoClean methodology, helps isolating and understanding some major WordNet?s semantic limitations. We suggest that such analysis could hopefully lead to an ?ontologically sweetened? WordNet, meant to be conceptually more rigorous, cognitively transparent, and efficiently exploitable in several applications.

/pdf/sweetening-ontologies-with-dolce-35idxeexkf.pdf

Sweetening Ontologies with DOLCE

The word \ontology" has recently gained a good popularity within the knowledge engineering community. However, its meaning tends to remain a bit vague, as the term is used in very difierent ways. Limiting our attention to the various proposals made in the current debate in AI, we isolate a number of interpretations, which in our opinion deserve a suitable clariflcation. We elucidate the implications of such various interpretations, arguing for the need of clear terminological choices regarding the technical use of terms like \ontology", \conceptualization" and \ontological commitment". After some comments on the use \Ontology" (with the capital \o") as a term which denotes a philosophical discipline, we analyse the possible confusion between an ontology intended as a particular conceptual framework at the knowledge level and an ontology intended as a concrete artifact at the symbol level, to be used for a given purpose. A crucial point in this clariflcation efiort is the careful analysis of Gruber’ s deflnition of an ontology as a speciflcation of a conceptualization.

/pdf/ontologies-and-knowledge-bases-towards-a-terminological-3vv8snlqdb.pdf

Ontologies and Knowledge Bases. Towards a Terminological Clarification

Explosing common misuses of the subsumption relationship and the formal basis for why they are wrong.

/pdf/evaluating-ontological-decisions-with-ontoclean-6971nex6hz.pdf

Nicola Guarino

Papers

What Is an Ontology

Formal ontology, conceptual analysis and knowledge representation

Sweetening Ontologies with DOLCE

Ontologies and Knowledge Bases. Towards a Terminological Clarification

Evaluating ontological decisions with OntoClean