Ontological Knowledge Base

From GM-RKB
(Redirected from Ontology)
Jump to: navigation, search

An ontological knowledge base is a machine-readable knowledge base with a formal semantic model.



References

2019

  1. G Budin (2005), "Ontology-driven translation management", in Helle V. Dam (ed.), Knowledge Systems and Translation, Jan Engberg, Heidrun Gerzymisch-Arbogast, Walter de Gruyter, p. 113, ISBN 978-3-11-018297-2
  2. Ehrlinger, Lisa; Wob, Wolfram (2016). "Towards a Definition of Knowledge Graphs" (PDF).
  3. "What is a Knowledge Graph?". 2018.

2015

2010

2009a

2009b

2009c

2009d

2009e

  • (Vossen, 2009) ⇒ Piek Vossen. (2009) "Building Wordnets." PowerPoint Presentation: https://slideplayer.com/slide/736731/
    • QUOTE: "Slide 6: Linguistic versus conceptual ontologies"
      • Conceptual ontology:
      • A particular level or structuring may be required to achieve a better control or performance, or a more compact and coherent structure.
        • Introduce artificial levels for concepts which are not lexicalized in a language (e.g. instrumentality, hand tool),
        • Neglect levels which are lexicalized but not relevant for the purpose of the ontology (e.g. tableware, silverware, merchandise).
        • What properties can we infer for spoons?
          • spoon -> container; artifact; hand tool; object; made rof metal or plastic; for eating, pouring or cooking
      • Linguistic ontology:
        • Exactly reflects the relations between all the lexicalized words and expressions in a language.
        • Valuable information about the lexical capacity of languages: what is the available fund of words and expressions in a language.
        • What words can be used to name spoons?
          • spoon -> object, tableware, silverware, merchandise, cutlery,

2009f

2008a

2008b

2007

2006

2005

2004a

  1. Several ontologies are already available on the Internet, including a few hundred more or less extensively defined concepts.
  2. For example, it has been claimed by several researchers (e.g., Oltramari et al., 2002) that in WordNet there is no clear separation between concept-synsets, instance-synsets, relation-synsets, and meta-property-synsets.

2004b

2003

  • (Kalfoglou & Schorlemmer, 2003) ⇒ Yannis Kalfoglou, and Marco Schorlemmer. (2003). “Ontology mapping: the State of the Art.” In: The Knowledge Engineering Review.
    • QUOTE: We shall adopt an algebraic approach and present ontologies as logical theories. An ontology is then a pair O = (S,A), where [math]S[/math] is the (ontological) signature describing the vocabulary — and [math]A[/math] is a set of (ontological) axioms — specifying the intended interpretation of the vocabulary in some domain of discourse. Typically, an ontological signature will be modelled by some mathematical structure. For instance, it could consist of a hierarchy of concept or class symbols modelled as a partial ordered set (poset), together with a set of relations symbols whose arguments are defined over the concepts of the concept hierarchy. The relations themselves might also be structured into a poset. For the purposes of this survey we shall not commit to any particular definition of ontological signature; we refer to the definitions of ‘ontology’, ‘core ontology’, or ‘ontology signature’ in (Kalfoglou and Schorlemmer 2002; Stumme and Maedche 2001; Bench-Capon and Malcolm 1999), respectively, for some examples of what we consider here an ontological signature. In addition to the signature specification, ontological axioms are usually restricted to a particular sort or class of axioms, depending on the kind of ontology.

2002

1999

1995

  • (Guarino & Giaretta, 1995) ⇒ Nicola Guarino, and Pierdaniele Giaretta. (1995). “Ontologies and Knowledge Bases: Towards a Terminological Clarification.” In: "Towards Very Large Knowledge Bases". N.J.L. Mars. (editor). IOS Press. ISBN:78-90-5199-217-5
    • QUOTE: Figure 1: Possible interpretations of the term “ontology".
    • The interpretation 1 is radically different from all the others, and its implications are discussed in the next section. The current debate regards the interpretations 2-7: 2 and 3 conceive an ontology as a conceptual "semantic" entity, either formal or informal, while according to the interpretations 5-7 an ontology is a specific "syntactic" object. The interpretation 4, which has been recently proposed as a definition of what an ontology is for the AI community [4, 5], is one of the more problematic, and it will be discussed in detail in the present paper. It may be classified as "syntactic" but its precise meaning depends on the understanding of the terms "specification" and "conceptualization".

1993