Corpus Guided Sense Cluster Analysis: a methodology for ontology development (with examples from the spatial domain)

The paper explores problems in ontology construction that arise due to the complex mapping between language and meaning. A new methodology is proposed, which combines a definitional approach using formal logic, with corpus-based statistical analysis of the use of terminology in natural language text. Underlying the approach is a semantic theory in which the notion of sense cluster plays a central role. Rather than having a single precise definition, the referent of a conceptual term is taken to be a sense cluster, modelled by a probability distribution over a set of precise definitions. This style of semantic specification pays heed to insights into the nature of language coming from philosophers such as Wittgenstein and his followers; but it also provides a framework supporting rigorous formal ontology development, which is often regarded as incompatible with the view of language suggested by Wittgenstein (in his later works). Although the methodology is quite general, this paper will mainly draw its examples from the domain of spatial properties and relations, and will examine the complex correspondence between the spatial vocabulary of natural language and logically defined geometrical constraints.

[1]  John A. Bateman Ontological diversity: the case from space , 2010, FOIS.

[2]  Nicola Guarino,et al.  Evaluating ontological decisions with OntoClean , 2002, CACM.

[3]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon,et al.  METHODOLOGIES FOR ONTOLOGY DEVELOPMENT , 2007 .

[4]  Philipp Cimiano,et al.  Ontology learning and population from text - algorithms, evaluation and applications , 2006 .

[5]  Ernest Davis,et al.  Qualitative Spatial Reasoning in Interpreting Text and Narrative , 2013, Spatial Cogn. Comput..

[6]  Thora Tenbrink,et al.  A linguistic ontology of space for natural language processing , 2010, Artif. Intell..

[7]  Klaus Krippendorff,et al.  Answering the Call for a Standard Reliability Measure for Coding Data , 2007 .

[8]  Robert Meersman,et al.  An ontology engineering methodology for DOGMA , 2008, Appl. Ontology.

[9]  Nicola Guarino,et al.  A Pointless Theory of Space Based on Strong Connection and Congruence , 1996, KR.

[10]  Barry Smith,et al.  SNAP and SPAN: Towards Dynamic Spatial Ontology , 2004, Spatial Cogn. Comput..

[11]  Vyvyan Evans,et al.  The Semantics of English Prepositions: Spatial Scenes, Embodied Meaning, and Cognition , 2003 .

[12]  Anthony G. Cohn,et al.  A Spatial Logic based on Regions and Connection , 1992, KR.

[13]  Robert B. Dewell,et al.  Over again: Image-schema transformations in semantic analysis , 1994 .

[14]  Achille C. Varzi Reasoning about space: The hole story , 2003 .

[15]  Achille C. Varzi,et al.  Holes and Other Superficialities , 1994 .

[16]  Ernest Davis,et al.  How does a box work? A study in the qualitative dynamics of solid objects , 2011, Artif. Intell..

[17]  Ernest Davis Space, Language, and Ontology: A Response to Bateman , 2013, Spatial Cogn. Comput..

[18]  Thomas R. Gruber,et al.  Toward principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing? , 1995, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[19]  John A. Bateman Space, Language and Ontology: A Response to Davis , 2013, Spatial Cogn. Comput..

[20]  Nicola Guarino,et al.  WonderWeb Deliverable D18 Ontology Library , 2003 .

[21]  Douglas B. Lenat,et al.  Language, representation and contexts , 1992 .

[22]  Vinay K. Chaudhri,et al.  A Vocabulary of Topological and Containment Relations for a Practical Biological Ontology , 2013, COSIT.

[23]  Pragya Agarwal,et al.  Semantic Categories Underlying the Meaning of 'Place' , 2007, COSIT.

[24]  Michael Uschold,et al.  Ontologies: principles, methods and applications , 1996, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[25]  David Osumi-Sutherland,et al.  The Drosophila anatomy ontology , 2013, Journal of Biomedical Semantics.