The Loreley Of Ontology Design Patterns

The Loreley of the Ontology Design Patterns

Double vocal projection:
http://ontologydesignpatterns.org
http://www.gong.manchester.ac.uk/odp/html/index.html

Dr. Violeta Damjanovic
Salzburg Research Forschungsgesellschaft m.b.H.
Jakob Haringer Straße 5/3 | 5020 Salzburg, Austria
T +43.662.2288-427 | F +43.662.2288-222
violeta.damjanovic@salzburgresearch.at
www.salzburgresearch.at

Preamble

| Ontology Design Pattern -> ODP
| ODP: a new testament to known problems in ontology engineering
| ODP: a practical solution to semantic interoperability of different
knowledge configurations (components and approaches)

01.04.2009 © Salzburg Research Forschungsgesellschaft 2008. No reproduction without written permission. 2

Ontology Engineering

| Ontologies are engineering artefacts that can formally represent the
concepts and their relationships within a given knowledge domain
| Ontologies are implemented in different KR (Knowledge
Representation) languages differing in properties that can be
described along the following axes:
Syntax
|
Semantics
|
Expressiveness
|
Reasoning
|
| Ontologies provide shared and common understanding of a domain


History of Using Patterns in Ontology Engineering: Selected papers
| J.R. Reich, 1999: Ontological Design Patterns for the Integration of
Molecular Biological Information. GCB’99, Germany.
introduces the notion of ODP for a particular problem domain in Biology
|
| S. Staab, M. Erdmann, A. Maedche, 2001: Engineering Ontologies
Using Semantic Patterns. IJCAI '01, USA.
language independent description of a certain concepts, relation or axiom
|
| V. Devedzic, 2002: Understanding Ontological Engineering.
Communications of the ACM, Vol.45, No.4, 2002, pp. 136-144.
similarities between traditional SDP and ontologies
|
| P. Clark, J. Thompson, B. Porter, 2003: Knowledge Patterns.
Springer. International Handbooks on Information Systems.
conceptual patterns that are “morphed” into a given knowledge base by a
|
set of mapping axioms
| V. Svatek, 2004: Design Patterns for Semantic Web Ontologies:
Motivation and Discussion. 7th Conf.on Business Inform.Systems.
| A. Gangemi, 2005: Ontology Design Patterns for Semantic Web
Content. LNCS 1729 ISWC 2005, 262-276.
| …


Ontology Design Patterns in General (1)

| ODP: abstract, formalized and documented solutions to the frequent
and typical modelling problems
| SDP < --- > ODP
| The UML notation to OWL axioms mapping proposed in [Brockmans
et al., 2004]:


Ontology Design Patterns in General (2)

| ODP: “cookbook recipes” [Aranguren et al., 2008]
| ODPs are abstract and implementation independent
| Applying a particular ODP, e.g.:
Competency questions help in choosing an appropriate ODP
|
Ontology Processing Language (OPL) can be used to create ODP in a
|
new ontology
| OPL plugin: http://www.co-ode.org/downloads/protege-x/opl/
| ODPs can be classified according to their complexity, granularity,
usability, popularity, etc.


Bio-Ontology Engineering

| GENE (GEne ontology NExt generation) project
“ODP for the formalization of biological ontologies”, Thesis by Mikel
|
Egaña Aranguren. 2005. Available @
http://www.gong.manchester.ac.uk/doc/MPhil_thesis.pdf.gz)
| The ODP Catalog can be explored @ http://odps.sourceforge.net/
| ODPs are classified according to the way they are used:
Extensional ODPs (Exception ODP, N-ary Relationship ODP)
|
Good practice ODPs (Normalization ODP, Value Partition ODP, Upper
|
Level ODP)
Domain Modelling ODPs (List ODP, Adapted SEP Triples ODP)
|


Classification of ODP for Bio-Ontologies

| Extensional ODPs:
N-ary Relationships: to model complex phenomena that have
|
relationships linking more than one element
Exception: to model classes that break canonical classifications
|
| Good practice ODPs:
Normalization: to build modular and reusable ontologies
|
Value Partition: to model attributes of objects that can only have certain
|
already known values
Upper Level Ontology: to create an ontology than can integrate different
|
ontologies in itself
| Domain Modelling ODPs:
List: to model ordered groups of elements
|
Adapted SEP Triples: propagation of properties along the partonomy
|
relation


Adapted SEP Triple in Action
[Seidenberg & Rector, 2006]


ODP Initiative: Classification of Ontology Design Patterns
[Presutti et al., 2008]


Content Ontology Design Pattern
[Gangemi, 2005]

| Content ODP shows certain characteristics:
Computational components
|
Small, autonomous components
|
Hierarchical components
|
Inference-enabling components
|
Cognitively relevant components
|
Linguistically relevant components
|
Best practice components
|
| Content ODP ways of creation [Presutti & Gangemi, 2008]
Reengineering from other data models
|
Specialization/Composition of other Content ODP
|
Extraction from reference ontologies
|
Creation by combining the above techniques
|
| Set of operation for creation of Content ODP
Covering: connects Content ODP and requirements
|
Clone: copies an ontology element from an existing ontology
|
Composition: relates two Content ODPs and results into a new ontology
|
Specialization & Generalization: defines a partial ordering between Content ODPs
|
Expansion: relation between CODPs and either ontology elements or axioms
|

Catalog of Content Ontology Design Pattern
[Presutti et al., 2008]

| General: types of entities; description; situation; classification; n-ary
classification; object role;
| Parts and collections: part of; time indexed part of; composition; constituency;
collection entity;
| Semiotics: intension extension; information realization;
| Quantities and dimensions: region; region overlap; parameter; parameter
region;
| Participation: participation; co-participation; n-ary participation;
| Organization, management, and scheduling: precedence (sequence); agent
role; task role; time-indexed person role; basic plan description; basic plan
execution; basic plan;
| Business: price; sales and purchase order contracts;
| Time: time interval;
| Space: move;
| Life science: linnean taxonomy;
| Multimedia: multimedia data segment decomposition


Conclusion

| ODP are ready-made solutions for tackling complex modelling issues
when creating and maintaining ontologies
| ODP improve ontology engineering in different ways [Brockmans et
al., 2004]
ODPs are abstractions: faster ontology creation; easy way of dealing with
|
the complexity of e.g. OWL-DL
ODPs produce more modular and robust ontologies: the entities and the
|
structure of ontologies can be explicitly separated
ODPs improve communication between ontology developers
|
| ODP life-cycle:
Identifying ODP
|
Testing ODP
|
ODP becomes a part of the system (language)
|
| Protégé plugin for applying ODPs ?
http://www.co-ode.org/downloads/protege-x/patterns/
|


Literature

| S. Brockmans, R. Volz, A. Eberhart, P. Löffler, 2004: Visual Modelling of
OWL DL Ontologies Using UML. Proc. ISWC 2004, 198-213.
| M.E. Aranguren, E. Antezana, M. Kuiper, R. Stevens, 2008. Ontology
Design Patterns for Bio-Ontologies: A Case Study on the Cell Cycle
Ontology. BMC bioinformatics 2008, 9(Suppl 5):S1. [BMC Bioinformatics]
| J. Seidenberg, A. Rector, ´2006. Representing Transitive Propagation in
OWL, ER2006.
| V. Presutti, A. Gangemi, 2008. Content Ontology Design Patterns as
Practical Building Blocks for Web Ontologies, In Proceedings of the 27th
International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (ER 2008)
| V. Presutti, et al., 2008. NeOn D2.5.1: A Library of Ontology Design
Patterns: Reusable Solutions for Collaborative Design of Networked
Ontologies.
| A. Gangemi, 2005. Ontology Design Patterns for Semantic Web Content.
LNCS 1729 ISWC 2005, 262-276.


Contribute to the ODP efforts

• http://www.ontologydesignpatterns.org

• http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/


The Loreley Of Ontology Design Patterns

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Semelhante a The Loreley Of Ontology Design Patterns

Semelhante a The Loreley Of Ontology Design Patterns (20)

Último

Último (20)

The Loreley Of Ontology Design Patterns