ONTOLOGYJAM
A Toll for Ontology Reuse
Luis Fernando Piasseski, Cesar Augusto Tacla, Milton Borsato
Departament of Information Technology, Federal University of Technology in Parana
Av. 7 de Setembro 3164, Curitiba-PR, Brazil
Keywords: Ontology, Research, Knowledge Management, Reuse.
Abstract: There has been notable growth in the use of ontologies in knowledge management. This occurs because,
with the use of ontologies, knowledge is shared and reuse efficiently and clearly among all the resources,
such as a person or an application. However, for the ontologies to establish confidence within an extremely
competitive and flexible market, they must be created in a way that is swift and has high credibility,
portability and scalability. However, there is a noted lack of tools to aid knowledge specialists in the
activities of construction of a new ontology. For this purpose, this article presents a tool that enables the
performance of concept research in the knowledge entities represented in an ontology, through the import of
multiple ontologies. As a result, knowledge can be exported into a brand new ontology. Thus, based on the
knowledge reuse, with the aim of extending an ontology so as to make it adequate to its application.
1 INTRODUCTION
Methodologies for the construction of ontologies are
approached in various studies and the fact that a
standardized methodology does not exist contributes
to this diversity. As an example, Methontology
(Gomez-Pérez et al., 1997), On-To-Knowledge
Methontology (OTKM) (Sure et al., 2001), by
Uschold & King (Uschold and Gruninger, 1996), by
Gruninger & Fox (Grüninger and Fox, 1995). The
most of methodologies recommends that knowledge
specialists perform research in other ontologies with
the purpose of reuse the concepts that are in
accordance with the domain researched. This avoids
re-work and gives prioritizes the sharing of
knowledge.
For OTKM (Sure et al., 2001), the “Viability
Study” and the “Kickoff” are the phases during
which the knowledge specialist should do research
into other ontologies. In the first, the research is
conducted to evaluate the feasibility of the ontology
to be created. For the second, the specialist should
evaluate other ontologies with the purpose of reuse
concepts already defined for the creation of a list of
concepts that make up the new ontology. These
concepts are utilized in the “Refining” phase.
In the Methontology (Gomez-Pérez et al., 1997),
“Specification” and “Integration” are phases in
which the reuse of concepts should take place.
“Specification” can be compared to the “Kickoff”
phase of OTKM. “Integration” is the phase that
explicitly deals with the reuse of concepts; this
occurs through a semantic and contextual analysis of
concepts already defined in other ontologies in order
to reuse them.
The activities of knowledge reuses results in a
laborious activity for the specialist, currently this is
done manually, that is, the ontology must be scanned
and analysed concept by concept using tools such as
Protégé, that are not specific to the activity. Thus, in
many cases, this stage of the ontology construction
is not concluded.
There are several techniques to reuse resources
of ontology, for example, the ontology matching,
they are based on semantic and syntactic analysis to
identify similar concepts and properties. However,
this processes do not produce reliable results, for
example, when the knowledge specialist want
include a new concept into your ontology, the
matching is not recommended to do this, because de
goal is include a new concept and no match a
concept.
The aim of this project is build a tool to improve
the activities of construction of ontologies. In order
to provide the search for concepts and properties in
several other ontologies for the purpose of build a
new ontology. The chart below shows the life cycle
for the development of each methodology, as well as
483
Piasseski L., Tacla C. and Borsato M. (2010).
ONTOLOGYJAM - A Toll for Ontology Reuse.
In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Software and Data Technologies, pages 483-486
DOI: 10.5220/0002863504830486
Copyright
c
 SciTePress

the phases in which OntologyJam can be used.
Figure 1: Phases of Methodology vs. OntologyJam.
2 ONTOLOGYJAM PROJECT
This chapter presents the methods applied to carry
out the project.
2.1 Stages
A technical-theoretical approach is applied for
carrying out the project, that is, in the first place, a
theoretical basis was sought in regards to ontologies,
OWL, Jena, Protégé, as well as a survey of
requirements. Subsequently, development of the tool
was initiated.
Firstly, the search information stage aims the
understanding how the “tags” available in the OWL
language manage the information contained in an
ontology, and which methods and classes of Jena
offers to manipulate this information. Protégé was
used to aid in this stage.
The second stage was the prototype, considered
the milestone, and first deliverable of the project,
supported with a prototype presentation to those
interested in the project. Its performance was
evaluated for each functionality defined in the phase
of surveying requirements. The improvements to the
tool were also enumerated.
2.1.1 Development
The OntologyJam was built according to
functionalities presented in Figure 2. As well, each
screen of the system should be treated individually,
however the set of them transforms the complete
interface. For this to be possible, each screen was
treated as an “Internal Frame”, when each frame is
inserted into the work area of OntologyJam. This
frames can be enables activated through the
respective buttons, or links and they can be treated
independently by the user.
Figure 2: Use Case Diagram.
2.2 Tests
First of all, the tool was introduced to the
certification team by presenting its functionalities,
with the purpose of explaining the navigation
between screens, how to import and how to create a
new ontology. As well, the manual was delivered,
containing a description of functionalities
exemplified by the respective screens, the test cases
and an evaluation questionnaire. The certification
team was composed of four people and had two
weeks to perform the tests and fill in the
questionnaire. The questionnaire included open
questions about each system functionality and about
the set of conducted tests. The system could be
evaluated in a scale that ranged from zero to five
points. Two test cases were formulated, one for the
usability test and the other for the functional test.
3 RESULTS
3.1 Analysis
In order to develop the software, the Java language
was adopted, mainly because it offers portability and
scalability, and also due to its integration with the
Jena API. From the point of view of performance of
the application, development in Java Swing was
chosen for the interface, thus, processing occurs
locally. In order to create the interface, framework
JSR-296 was used.
OntologyJam supports ontologies in OWL
language only. Therefore, for research in Swoogle a
prior check is made as to the type of ontology, which
is possible through the field “hasFiletype”, returned
by Swoogle. Ontologies that are not in conformity
with the reading standard for OntologyJam are
informed to the user.
For the research functionality, a research method
was used based on simple text comparisons, only
differentiating between upper-case and lower-case
letters, without taking into account the semantics of
the terms.
ICSOFT 2010 - 5th International Conference on Software and Data Technologies
484

Figure 3: Swoogle Search.
Figure 4: Export Screen.
3.1.1 Use Cases
The Use Case Import covers the import of
ontologies in OWL that will serve as bases for the
tool. There are two ways to this import, in order
remote, that is, posted on the internet, by their URI
address, or locally. These ontologies serve as basis
to the search for concepts and properties.
The Use Case Ontology Research covers the
research of entities in the ontologies given in the list
of ontologies imported by the system. This
functionality serves to specify the way in which the
research will be conducted, which techniques will be
used by the system, as well as the interaction with
the user for the success of the research.
The Export functionality covers the export of the
brand new ontology in order to reuse the concepts,
properties and characteristics of the imported
ontologies. Therefore, specifies the functionalities
existing in the option to export the constructed
ontology.
The Use Case Swoogle Research covers the
research using the Swoogle ontology database,
which, for its part, uses semantic techniques in its
research. This functionality conducts research on
terms, entities or keywords in multiple ontologies
posted on the Swoogle database.
3.2 System Interface
OntologyJam was developed with an interface that is
easy to understand, with links that aid in navigability
between screens, which makes OntologyJam an agi-
le and user-friendly application.
The Swoogle research screen, presented in
Figure 3, enables the user to conduct semantic
research in ontologies using the Swoogle search
mechanism, with the enormous advantage that, with
one click, the user can import the desired ontology.
However, one specific ontology can be import
through the URI address, or located on the local
Hard Disk.
The search allows the user to conduct research in
the previously imported ontologies. The result is
divided by ontologies, classes and properties in
which the term was found. When a concept, property
or ontology is selected, several details of the selected
item are presented. Activating the option “Add to
Favorites”, the concept is added to the folder
“Favorite Classes”. This way, the user can select the
main concepts that deems necessary.
The export screen, presented in Figure 4, the user
can set up the taxonomic tree of the new ontology
based on the taxonomic tree of the selected concept.
From the export screen is possible select the options
of this exportation, such as, insert a comment and
label to new ontology, as well, exports the labels, the
comments, disjoints, necessary, necessary &
sufficient of classes, and ranges, comments, labels of
properties in the export tree.
4 DISCUSSION
Several methodologies have been created with the
purpose of aiding and standardizing the development
ONTOLOGYJAM - A Toll for Ontology Reuse
485

of ontologies. Each one has its techniques and
principles. However, it should be noted that, no
matter which methodology is adopted, knowledge
specialists should always think about reuse concepts
from other ontologies.
The evaluation of OntologyJam, made during its
certification phase by final users has left important
insights that will be considered for the future
enhancements of the software tool, as they represent
indicate improvements that the tool needs to perform
its functionalities more appropriately.
In relation to functionalities, the search function
was the one that had the lowest evaluation, which is
due to the way in which the search is done.
OntologyJam conducts the search based on the
comparison of texts, with simple differentiation
between higher and lower case letters, without
taking into account the semantics of the terms, for
example, radicals, synonyms and hyper-synonyms.
Ideally, this search should be conducted using
adequate algorithms. This way, the final result
would be more explicit and efficient.
5 CONCLUSIONS
The development of this project was based on the
reuse of the concepts already defined in other
ontologies with the objective of aiding knowledge
specialists in the first steps of creating an ontology.
The result was the development of a tool that aids
not only in reuse, but also in sharing, management
and creation of a single meaning for knowledge.
OntologyJam was tested by people with
knowledge of ontologies and together with the tests,
it was proposed that a questionnaire be filled out
with the purpose of obtaining an evaluation of all
functionalities, the icons, the navigation and the
results presented by the tool through a critical view
of the users.
The results of the questionnaire were very
positive, again exceeding expectations. Therefore,
the conclusion that can be reached is that
OntologyJam will be well accepted by the majority
of users, as a useful everyday tool for knowledge
specialists.
The main contribution of this project is a specific
tool for reuse concepts from other ontologies; a need
have not been attended to by IT yet. However, the
conclusion of this project is far from meeting all the
needs of the ontology creation process.
The experiences acquired during this project,
new ways will be opened for the implementation of
the new tools that can meet all the needs of
knowledge specialists. The integration of these tools
based on existing methodologies will enable new
domains of knowledge to be mapped in new
ontologies in a much easier way.
REFERENCES
Bechhofer Sean, Harmelen Frank, Hendler Jim, Horrocks
Ian Mcguinness Deborah, Patel-Schneider Peter e
Stein Lynn “OWL Web Ontology Language
Reference”, W3C Recommendation, 2004
Borst, Willem Nico, “Construction of Engineering
Ontologies”, University of Tweenty. Thesis Enschede,
The Netherlands - Centre for Telematica and
Information Technology, 1997.
Bruijin de Jos, “Using Ontologies, Enabling Knowledge
Sharing and Reuse on the Semantic Web”, DERI
(Digital Enterprise Research Institute), 2003
Ding Li, Finin Tim, Joshi Anupam, Peng Yun, Cost Scott,
Sachs Joel, PAN Rong, Reddivari Pavan e Doshi
Vishal, “Swoogle: A Semantic Web Search and
Metadata Engine”, Department of Computer Science
and Electronic Engineering University of Maryland
Baltimore County, 2004
Gomez-Pérez Assunción, Fernandez Mariano, Pazos Juan
e Pazos Alejandro "Building a Chemical Ontology
Using Methodology and the Ontolofy Design
Environment" 1999, pp. 37-45.
Gomez-Pérez Assunción, Fernandez Mariano e Juristo
Natalia, "Methontology: From Ontological Art
towards Ontological Engineering" Proc. AAAI Spring
Symp. Series, AAAI Press, Menlo Park, Calif., 1997,
pp. 33-40.
Gruber, Thomas “Toward Principles for the Design of
Ontologies Used for Knowledge Sharing”, Stanford
Knowledge Systems Laboratory, 1992
Gruber, Thomas, “A Translation approach to portable
ontology specification” Knowledge Acquisition, Vol.5
(2):199-200, Stanford University 1993.
Grüninger, M., Fox, M. S. “Methodology for the design
and evaluation of ontologies”, In: IJCAI95 Workshop
on Basic Ontological Issues in Knowledge Sharing,
Montreal, Canada, 1995.
Smith Michael, Welty Chris e McGuinness “OWL Web
Ontology Language Guide”, W3C Recommendation,
2004, available in:
Sure York, Staab Steffen e Studer Rudi "On-To-
Knowledge Methodology (OTKM)", 2001.
Sure York e Studer Rudi "On-To-Knowledge Methodology
- Final Version", University of Karlsruhe, 2002.
Staab Steffen, Studer Rudi, Schnurr Hans-Peter e Sure
York, "Knowledge Process and Ontologies", IEEE
Intelligent Systems, vol. 16, No. 1, January/February,
2001.
Uschold, M. e Gruninger, M. “Ontologies: Principles,
Methods and Applications”, 1996, Knowledge
Engineering Review.
ICSOFT 2010 - 5th International Conference on Software and Data Technologies
486