zbMATH — the first resource for mathematics

Evaluation of ontologies. (English) Zbl 0990.68144
Summary: The evaluation of ontologies is an emerging field. At present, there is an absence of a deep core of preliminary ideas and guidelines for evaluating ontologies. This paper presents a brief summary of previous work done on evaluating ontologies and the criteria (consistency, completeness, conciseness, expandability, and sensitiveness) used to evaluate and to assess ontologies. It also addresses the possible types of errors made when domain knowledge is structured in taxonomies in an ontology and in knowledge bases: circularity errors, exhaustive and nonexhaustive class partition errors, redundancy errors, grammatical errors, semantic errors, and incompleteness errors. It also describes the process followed to evaluate the standard-units ontology already published at the ontology server.

68T35 Theory of languages and software systems (knowledge-based systems, expert systems, etc.) for artificial intelligence
Full Text: DOI
[1] (ONTO)2Agent: An ontology-based WWW broker to select ontologies. In: Workshop on Applications of Ontologies and PSMs, Brighton, United Kingdom, August 1998, p 16-24.
[2] Stratified ontologies: The case of physical objects. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Ontological Engineering. Held in conjunction with the Eleventh Conference on Artificial Intelligence 1996, Budapest, 1996, p 5-15.
[3] The Ontolingua server: A tool for collaborative ontology construction. In: Proceedings of the 10th Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-Based Systems Workshop, Banff, Alberta, Canada, 1996, p 44.1-44.19.
[4] Fern?ndez, IEEE Intell Syst Appl 4 pp 37– (1999)
[5] Knowledge interchange format; Technical Report; Computer Science Department, Stanford University, Logic-92-1, 1992.
[6] Ontological reengineering for reuse. Knowledge acquisition modeling and management. In: 11th European Workshop, EKAW’99. Dagstuhl Castle, Germany, May 26-29, 1999, p 139-156.
[7] Knowledge sharing and reuse. In: editor. The handbook of applied expert systems. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 1998.
[8] G?mez-P?rez, Expert Syst Appl 11 pp 519– (1996)
[9] Evaluation and assessment of the knowledge sharing technology. In: editor. Towards very large knowledge bases. Amsterdam: IOS Press; 1995.
[10] Some ideas and examples to evaluate ontologies; Technical Report KSL-94-65; Knowledge System Laboratory, Stanford University. Also in Proceedings of the 11th Conference on Artificial Intelligence for Applications, CAIA94, 1994.
[11] From knowledge based systems to knowledge sharing technology: Evaluation and assessment; Technical Report KSL-94-73; Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Stanford University, December 1994.
[12] An ontology for engineering mathematics; Technical Report KSL-94-18; Knowledge Systems Laboratory, Stanford University, CA, 1994.
[13] Gruber, Knowledge Acquisition 5 pp 199– (1993)
[14] Gruber, Int J Human Comput Stud 43 pp 907– (1993) · Zbl 05478295
[15] Methodology for the design and evaluation of ontologies. In: Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence 1995 Workshop on Basic Ontological Issues in Knowledge Sharing, 1995.
[16] Building large knowledge-based systems. Representation and inference in the cyc project. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley; 1990.
[17] MacGregor, SIGART Bull 2 pp 70– (1991)
[18] Towards distributed use of large-scale ontologies. In: Spring Symposium Series on Ontological Engineering, Stanford University, CA, 1997, p 138-148.
[19] Uschold, Knowledge Eng Rev 11 pp 1996– (1996) · Zbl 0875.68349
[20] Where are killer apps? In: Workshop on Applications of Ontologies and Problem Solving Methods, Eleventh Conference on Artificial Intelligence 1998, Brighton, United Kingdom, 1998.
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. It attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming the completeness or perfect precision of the matching.