An Ontology Selection and Ranking System Based on the Analytic Hierarchy Process

Selecting the desired ontology from a collection of available ones is essential for ontology reuse. We address the problem of evaluating, ranking and selecting ontologies according to user preferences. We exploit the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to solve the multiple-criteria decision problem and to model the preferences of the users. We use AHP to analyze the available ontologies from different perspectives and at different abstraction levels. The decision is based on the concrete end-node measurements and their relative importance at higher levels. For supporting the selection decision, we developed an ontology representation, reasoning and management system. The system applies different metrics on ontologies in order to feed the Analytic Hierarchy Process with facts. The running scenario applies our method to the task of reusing ontologies from the tourism domain.

[1]  오선주 Ontology selection ranking model for knowledge reuse , 2009 .

[2]  Yun Peng,et al.  Swoogle: Searching for Knowledge on the Semantic Web , 2005, AAAI.

[3]  Adrian Groza,et al.  Ranking ontologies in the Ontology Building Competition BOC 2014 , 2014, 2014 IEEE 10th International Conference on Intelligent Computer Communication and Processing (ICCP).

[4]  Yugyung Lee,et al.  OntoKhoj: a semantic web portal for ontology searching, ranking and classification , 2003, WIDM '03.

[5]  Valerie Belton,et al.  On the meaning of relative importance , 1997 .

[6]  Wei Wei,et al.  Enhancing PriEsT with Group Decision Making , 2013 .

[7]  Luis G. Vargas,et al.  Comparison of eigenvalue, logarithmic least squares and least squares methods in estimating ratios , 1984 .

[8]  Sushil Kumar,et al.  Analytic hierarchy process: An overview of applications , 2006, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[9]  Sean Bechhofer,et al.  The OWL API: A Java API for OWL ontologies , 2011, Semantic Web.

[10]  Alexis Tsoukiàs,et al.  Argumentation Theory and Decision Aiding , 2010, Trends in Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis.

[11]  John A. Keane,et al.  Priest: A Tool to Estimate Priorities from Inconsistent Judgments , 2013, 2013 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[12]  R. Subhashini A Review on Ontology Ranking Algorithms , 2011 .

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

[14]  Junpeng Chen,et al.  OS_RANK: Structure Analysis for Ontology Ranking , 2007, 2007 IEEE 23rd International Conference on Data Engineering Workshop.

[15]  Timothy W. Finin,et al.  Swoogle: a search and metadata engine for the semantic web , 2004, CIKM '04.

[16]  James A. Thom,et al.  Requirements-oriented methodology for evaluating ontologies , 2009, Inf. Syst..

[17]  Alexis Tsoukiàs,et al.  From decision theory to decision aiding methodology , 2008, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[18]  J. Akilandeswari A Review on Ontology Ranking Algorithms , 2011 .

[19]  Harith Alani,et al.  Ranking Ontologies with AKTiveRank , 2006, SEMWEB.

[20]  Ioan Alfred Letia,et al.  Arguing with Justifications between Collaborating Agents , 2011, ArgMAS.

[21]  Asunción Gómez-Pérez,et al.  ONTOMETRIC: A Method to Choose the Appropriate Ontology , 2004, J. Database Manag..

[22]  Amit P. Sheth,et al.  OntoQA: Metric-Based Ontology Quality Analysis , 2005 .

[23]  Ioan Alfred Letia,et al.  Using Domain Specific Hierarchical Good Practice for Ranking Service Compositions , 2014, 2014 16th International Symposium on Symbolic and Numeric Algorithms for Scientific Computing.

[24]  BechhoferSean,et al.  The OWL API: A Java API for OWL ontologies , 2011 .

[25]  Heon Young Yeom,et al.  A comprehensive framework for the evaluation of ontology modularization , 2012, Expert Syst. Appl..

[26]  Ian N. Durbach,et al.  The analytic hierarchy process with stochastic judgements , 2014, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[27]  Renzo C. B. Leonelli,et al.  Enhancing a Decision Support Tool with Sensitivity Analysis , 2012 .

[28]  Adrian Groza,et al.  OntoRich - A support tool for semi-automatic ontology enrichment and evaluation , 2011, 2011 IEEE 7th International Conference on Intelligent Computer Communication and Processing.

[29]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  DECISION MAKING WITH THE ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS , 2008 .