Ontology construction in an enterprise context: Comparing and evaluating two approaches

ICEIS 2006 - 8th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems, Proceedings

Volumn ISAS, Issue , 2006, Pages 86-93

  Blomqvist, Eva ^a   Öhgren, Annika ^a   Sandkuhl, Kurt ^a  

^a JÖNKÖPING UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Enterprise ontologies; Ontology engineering methods; Ontology evaluation

Indexed keywords

APPLICATION FIELDS; AUTOMATIC ONTOLOGY; AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLIER INDUSTRY; CONSTRUCTION OF ENTERPRISE; DOMAIN EXPERTS; ENTERPRISE ONTOLOGY; ONTOLOGY CONSTRUCTION; ONTOLOGY ENGINEERING; ONTOLOGY ENGINEERING METHODS; SUPPORTING KNOWLEDGE;

INFORMATION SYSTEMS; KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT;

ONTOLOGY;

EID: 77953881581     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (16)

1. Blomqvist, E. (2005). Fully Automatic Construction of Enterprise Ontologies Using Design Patterns: Initial Method and First Experiences. In Proc. of The 4th Intl Conf. on Ontologies, DataBases, and Applications of Semantics (ODBASE), Cyprus.
2. Brewster, C., Alani, H., Dasmahapatra, S., and Wilks, Y. (2004). Data Driven Ontology Evaluation. In Proc. of Intl Conf. on Language Resources and Evaluation, Portugal.
3. Davies, I., Green, P., Milton, S., and Rosemann, M. (2003). Using Meta Models for the Comparison of Ontologies. In Proc. of Eval. of Modeling Methods in Systems Analysis and Design Workshop-EMMSAD'03.
4. Gómez-Pérez, A. (1999). Evaluation of Taxonomic Knowledge in Ontologies and Knowledge Bases. In Banff Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-Based Systems, KAW'99, volume 2.
5. Guarino, N. (1998). Formal Ontology and Information Systems. In Proceedings of FOIS'98, pages 3-15.
6. Guarino, N. and Welty, C. (2002). Evaluating Ontological Decisions with OntoClean. Communications of the ACM, 45(2):61-65.
7. Hartmann, J., Spyns, P., Giboin, A., Maynard, D., Cuel, R., Suarez-Figueroa, M. C., and Sure, Y. (2005). D1.2.3 methods for ontology evaluation. Version 1.3.1, Available at: http://knowledgeweb.semanticweb.org/, Downloaded 2005-05-10.
8. Lozano-Tello, A. and Gómez-Pérez, A. (2004). ONTO-METRIC: A Method to Choose the Appropriate Ontology. Journal of Database Management, 15(2).
9. McGuinness, D., Fikes, R., Rice, J., and Wilder, S. (2000). An Environment for Merging and Testing Large Ontologies. In Proc. of the 7th Intl Conf. on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR2000), Colorado, USA.
10. Navigli, R., Velardi, P., Cucchiarelli, A., and Neri, F. (2004). Automatic Ontology Learning: Supporting a Per-Concept Evaluation by Domain Experts. In Workshop on Ontology Learning and Population (ECAI 2004), Valencia, Spain.
11. Noy, N. F. and Musen, M. A. (2000). PROMPT: Algorithm and Tool for Automated Ontology Merging and Alignment. In 17th National Conf. on AI (AAAI-2000), Austin, Texas.
12. Öhgren, A. and Sandkuhl, K. (2005). Towards a Methodology for Ontology Development in Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises. In IADIS Conference on Applied Computing, Algarve, Portugal.
13. Porzel, R. and Malaka, R. (2004). A Task-based Approach for ontology Evaluation. In Workshop on Ontology Learning and Population (ECAI 2004).
14. Supekar, K., Patel, C., and Lee, Y. (2004). Characterizing Quality of Knowledge on Semantic Web. In Proceedings of AAAI Florida AI Research Symposium (FLAIRS-2004), Miami Beach, Florida.
15. van Heijst, G., Schreiber, A. T., and Wielinga, B. J. (1997). Using explicit ontologies for KBS development. Intl Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 46(2-3).
16. Yao, H., Orme, A. M., and Etzkorn, L. (2005). Cohesion Metrics for Ontology Design and Application. Journal of Computer Science, 1(1):107-113.