Lightweight Ontologies in Context - Relationship between Ontology Characteristics and Context Parameters

Ilya M. Waldstein, Rosina O. Weber, Neal Handly

Abstract

Ontologies, mainly lightweight ontologies, are ubiquitous throughout the Internet and are succeeding in replacing human expertise. We conducted a study with physicians and nurses performing a search task in the medical domain that demonstrates that lightweight ontologies perform well as a substitute for expertise. The extent of success of the substitution depends upon context of use. Our study investigates lightweight ontologies with respect to the context of use in which they are applied. The better we understand the context of use, the better we can inform ontology design and evaluation. We describe ontologies through characteristics and context through parameters. By varying ontology characteristics and testing the effect on the performance of an ontology-supported task for a context parameter, such as the level of user expertise, we increase our understanding of ontology design and evaluation. Our study shows that changing ontologies by varying some of its characteristics has a direct and significant impact on the performance of the ontology-supported task for different levels of user expertise.

References

  1. Brewster, C & O'Hara, K. 2007, 'Knowledge representation with ontologies: Present challenges - Future possibilities', International Journal of HumanComputer Studies, vol. 65, no. 7, pp. 563-568.
  2. Dey, A. K. 1998, 'Context-Aware Computing: The CyberDesk Project', AAAI 1998 Spring Symposium on Intelligent Environments, Tech. Rpt. SS-98-02:51-54.
  3. Dey, A. K. & Abowd, G. D. 1999, 'Towards a Better Understanding of Context and Context-Awareness', GVU Technical Report; GIT-GVU-99-22.
  4. Doerschug, K. C., Peterson, M. W., Dayton, C. S., & Kline, J. N. 1999, 'Asthma Guidelines: An Assessment of Physician Understanding and Practice', American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, vol. 159, no. 6, pp. 1735-1741.
  5. Ericsson, K. A., Whyte I. V., J., & Ward, P. 2007, 'Expert Performance in Nursing Reviewing Research on Expertise in Nursing within the Framework of the Expert-Performance Approach', Advances in Nursing Science, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. E58-E71.
  6. Gangemi, A., Catenacci, C., Ciaramita, M., & Lehmann, J. 2006, 'Modeling Ontology Evaluation and Validation', In Y. Sure and J. Domingue (Eds.), Proceedings of the ESWC 2006, LNCS 4011, pp. 140- 154.
  7. Gómez-Pérez, A. 2001, 'Evaluation of ontologies', International Journal of Intelligent Systems, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 391-409.
  8. Gruber, T. R. 1995, 'Toward principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing', International journal of human computer studies, vol. 43, no. 5, pp. 907-928.
  9. Markman, A. B. & Wisniewski, E. J. 1997, 'Similar and Different: The Differentiation of Basic-Level Categories', Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 54-70.
  10. Noy, N. F. & McGuinness, D. L. 2001, 'Ontology development 101: A guide to creating your first ontology', Technical Report KSL-01-05, Stanford Medical Informatics.
  11. Porzel, R. & Malaka, R. 2005, 'A Task-Based Framework for Ontology Learning, Population and Evaluation', In P Buitelaar et al. (Eds.), Ontology learning from text: methods, evaluation and applications. pg. 107.
  12. Ryan, N., Pascoe, J., & Morse, D. 1997, 'Enhanced Reality Fieldwork: the Context-Aware Archaeological Assistant', In V. Gaffney, M. van Leusen, & S. Exxon (Eds.), Computer Applications in Archaeology.
  13. Schilit, B. & Theimer, M. 1994, 'Disseminating Active Map Information to Mobile Hosts', IEEE Network, vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 22-32.
  14. Strasunskas, D. & Tomassen, S. L. 2008, 'Empirical Insights on a Value of Ontology Quality in OntologyDriven Web Search', In R. Meersman & Z. Tari (Eds.), Proceedings of the OTM 08, Part II, LNCS 5332, pp. 1319-1337.
  15. Tatir, S., Arpinar, I. B., & Sheth, A. P. 2010, 'Ontological evaluation and validation', Theory and Applications of Ontology: Computer Applications, pp. 115-130.
  16. Uschold, M. & Gruninger, M. 2004, 'Ontologies and semantics for seamless connectivity', ACM SIGMod Record, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 58-64.
  17. Uschold, M. & King, M. 1995, 'Towards a methodology for building ontologies', In Workshop on basic ontological issues in knowledge sharing, vol. 74, Montreal, Canada.
  18. Xu, J. & Ma, X. 2008, 'A Web-Based Ontology Evaluation System', Workshop on Advanced Language Processing and Web Information Technology, In Proeedings of the ALPIT 2008 International Conference, pp. 104-107.
  19. Yu, J., Thom, J. A., & Tam, A. 2009, 'Requirementsoriented methodology for evaluating ontologies', Information Systems, vol. 34, no. 8, pp. 766-791.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

M. Waldstein I., O. Weber R. and Handly N. (2013). Lightweight Ontologies in Context - Relationship between Ontology Characteristics and Context Parameters . In Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Ontology Development - Volume 1: KEOD, (IC3K 2013) ISBN 978-989-8565-81-5, pages 308-315. DOI: 10.5220/0004550303080315


in Bibtex Style

@conference{keod13,
author={Ilya M. Waldstein and Rosina O. Weber and Neal Handly},
title={Lightweight Ontologies in Context - Relationship between Ontology Characteristics and Context Parameters},
booktitle={Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Ontology Development - Volume 1: KEOD, (IC3K 2013)},
year={2013},
pages={308-315},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0004550303080315},
isbn={978-989-8565-81-5},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Ontology Development - Volume 1: KEOD, (IC3K 2013)
TI - Lightweight Ontologies in Context - Relationship between Ontology Characteristics and Context Parameters
SN - 978-989-8565-81-5
AU - M. Waldstein I.
AU - O. Weber R.
AU - Handly N.
PY - 2013
SP - 308
EP - 315
DO - 10.5220/0004550303080315