Formal Versus Material Ontologies for Information Systems Interoperation in the Semantic Web

Information systems ontology is intended to facilitate interoperability among the many applications which are now becoming available on the Internet. In particular, it is intended to facilitate the development of intelligent agents which can automate a large part of the task of a user achieving some end employing multiple autonomous applications. A large number of ontologies exist supporting specific kinds of interoperation among selected, generally mutually aware, applications. The intent of the upper ontology movement is to develop an abstract description of what there is in the world, in an application-independent form, which can be used both to help build specific ontologies and to help in finding common ground among them. This paper argues that, for the purposes of information systems interoperation and the semantic web, application-independent upper ontologies are unlikely to be successful because of semantic heterogeneity. However, the paper argues for a distinction in upper ontologies between formal and material ontologies, based on analogies with concepts in Kant's synthetic a priori, and that formal ontologies whose focus is on how we see the world are more likely to be successfully developed in the absence of applications than are material ontologies, which attempt to catalog the world a priori. Categories and Descriptors: C.2.4 [Distributed Systems] Distributed Applications, Distributed Databases D.2.12 [Software Engineering] Interoperability---Data Mapping; H.3.5 [Information Storage and Retrieval] Online Information Services---Data Sharing and Web-based Services; H.2.1 [Database Management] Systems.

[1]  Chris Welty,et al.  FOIS introduction: Ontology---towards a new synthesis , 2001, FOIS.

[2]  Richard R. Weber Ontological Foundations of Information Systems: Coopers and Lybrand , 1997 .

[3]  John F. Sowa,et al.  Conceptual Structures: Information Processing in Mind and Machine , 1983 .

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

[5]  Heinrich Herre,et al.  GOL: A general ontological language , 2001 .

[6]  Michael Schrefl,et al.  Requester-centered composition of business processes from internal and external services , 2005, Data Knowl. Eng..

[7]  Edgar A. Whitley,et al.  The Construction of Social Reality , 1999 .

[8]  Nicola Guarino,et al.  Identity, Unity, and Individuality: Towards a Formal Toolkit for Ontological Analysis , 2000, ECAI.

[9]  Yiming Ye,et al.  Usage Scenarios and Goals for Ontology Definition Metamodel , 2004, WISE.

[10]  E. Wigner The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences (reprint) , 1960 .

[11]  Peter Gärdenfors,et al.  Conceptual spaces - the geometry of thought , 2000 .

[12]  Nicola Guarino,et al.  Cleaning-up WordNet's Top-Level , 2002 .

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

[14]  Weiming Shen,et al.  eMarketplaces for enterprise and cross enterprise integration , 2005, Data Knowl. Eng..

[15]  I. Kant,et al.  Critique of Pure Reason: Glossary , 1998 .

[16]  Christiane Fellbaum,et al.  Book Reviews: WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database , 1999, CL.

[17]  Ketil Stølen,et al.  What is model driven architecture , 2003 .

[18]  I. Kant,et al.  Critique of Pure Reason: Remark to the amphiboly of concepts of reflection , 1998 .

[19]  Nicola Guarino,et al.  Sweetening WORDNET with DOLCE , 2003, AI Mag..

[20]  Nicola Guarino,et al.  Sweetening Ontologies with DOLCE , 2002, EKAW.

[21]  Nicola Guarino,et al.  Supporting ontological analysis of taxonomic relationships , 2001, Data Knowl. Eng..

[22]  P. Simons Parts: A Study in Ontology , 1991 .

[23]  Robert M. Colomb Impact of Semantic Heterogeneity and Federating Databases , 1997, Comput. J..

[24]  Adam Pease,et al.  Towards a standard upper ontology , 2001, FOIS.

[25]  Ron Weber,et al.  Ontological foundations of information systems , 1997 .

[26]  Radboud Winkels,et al.  Use and Reuse of Legal Ontologies in Knowledge Engineering and Information Management , 2003, Law and the Semantic Web.

[27]  Joerg Evermann,et al.  Towards Ontologically Based Semantics for UML Constructs , 2001, ER.

[28]  C. Q. Lee,et al.  The Computer Journal , 1958, Nature.

[29]  Michael Johnson,et al.  Category-theoretic fibration as an abstraction mechanism in information systems , 2001, Acta Informatica.

[30]  Axel Uhl,et al.  Model-Driven Architecture , 2002, OOIS Workshops.