Overcoming the pitfalls of ontology authoring: Strategies and implications for tool design

The process of authoring ontologies appears to be fragmented across several tools and workarounds, and there exists no well accepted framework for common authoring tasks such as exploring ontologies, comparing versions, debugging, and testing. This lack of an adequate and seamless tool chain potentially hinders the broad uptake of ontologies, especially OWL, as a knowledge representation formalism. We start to address this situation by presenting insights from an interview-based study with 15 ontology experts. We uncover the tensions that may emerge between ontology authors including antagonistic ontology building styles (definition-driven vs. manually crafted hierarchies). We identify the problems reported by the ontology authors and the strategies they employ to solve them. These data are mapped to a set of key design recommendations, which should inform and guide future efforts for improving ontology authoring tool support, thus opening up ontology authoring to a new generation of users. We discuss future research avenues in light of these results.

[1]  Samantha Bail,et al.  The Cognitive Complexity of OWL Justifications , 2011, Description Logics.

[2]  V. R. Benjamins,et al.  WonderTools? A comparative study of ontological engineering tools , 2000, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[3]  Martin Hepp,et al.  Possible Ontologies: How Reality Constrains the Development of Relevant Ontologies , 2007, IEEE Internet Computing.

[4]  Jorge S. Cardoso.  The Semantic Web Vision: Where Are We? , 2007, IEEE Intelligent Systems.

[5]  Bijan Parsia,et al.  The modular structure of an ontology: an empirical study , 2010, Description Logics.

[6]  Pavel Klinov,et al.  Incremental Reasoning in OWL EL without Bookkeeping , 2013, International Semantic Web Conference.

[7]  Akrivi Katifori,et al.  Ontology visualization methods—a survey , 2007, CSUR.

[8]  Fabien L. Gandon,et al.  The Semantic Web: Trends and Challenges , 2014, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[9]  Arthur Stutt,et al.  Engineering Knowledge in the Age of the Semantic Web , 2004, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[10]  Csongor Nyulas,et al.  WebProtégé: A collaborative ontology editor and knowledge acquisition tool for the Web , 2013, Semantic Web.

[11]  Samantha Bail,et al.  The Justificatory Structure of the NCBO BioPortal Ontologies , 2011, International Semantic Web Conference.

[12]  Natalya F. Noy,et al.  BioPortal: Ontologies and Integrated Data Resources at the Click of a Mouse , 2009 .

[13]  Enrico Motta,et al.  Developing Ontologies in OWL: an Observational Study , 2006, OWLED.

[14]  Rob Procter,et al.  Distributed ontology building as practical work , 2011, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[15]  Asunción Gómez-Pérez,et al.  Ontology Requirements Specification , 2012, Ontology Engineering in a Networked World.

[16]  J. Cimino.  Desiderata for Controlled Medical Vocabularies in the Twenty-First Century , 1998, Methods of Information in Medicine.

[17]  Asunción Gómez-Pérez,et al.  The NeOn Methodology for Ontology Engineering , 2012, Ontology Engineering in a Networked World.

[18]  Alan L. Rector,et al.  Modularisation of domain ontologies implemented in description logics and related formalisms including OWL , 2003, K-CAP '03.

[19]  Robert Stevens,et al.  OWL Pizzas: Practical Experience of Teaching OWL-DL: Common Errors & Common Patterns , 2004, EKAW.

[20]  Robert Stevens,et al.  Towards Competency Question-Driven Ontology Authoring , 2014, ESWC.

[21]  Bernhard Ganter,et al.  Completing Description Logic Knowledge Bases Using Formal Concept Analysis , 2007, IJCAI.

[22]  Ali Khalili,et al.  User interfaces for semantic authoring of textual content: A systematic literature review , 2013, J. Web Semant..

[23]  Richard Power,et al.  Measuring the Understandability of Deduction Rules for OWL , 2012, WoDOOM@EKAW.

[24]  Asunción Gómez-Pérez,et al.  Ontology Engineering in a Networked World , 2012, Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

[25]  Enrico Motta,et al.  The Usability of Description Logics - Understanding the Cognitive Difficulties Presented by Description Logics , 2014, ESWC.

[26]  Robert Stevens,et al.  Protégé4US: Harvesting Ontology Authoring Data with Protégé , 2014, ESWC.

[27]  Patrick Lambrix,et al.  Evaluation of ontology development tools for bioinformatics , 2003, Bioinform..

[28]  Hao Wang,et al.  Analysis of User Editing Patterns in Ontology Development Projects , 2013, OTM Conferences.

[29]  V. Braun,et al.  Using thematic analysis in psychology , 2006 .

[30]  Aldo Gangemi,et al.  Unit Tests for Ontologies , 2006, OTM Workshops.

[31]  Antonella Carbonaro,et al.  The semantic web vision , 2014 .

[32]  Peter F. Patel-Schneider,et al.  Usability Issues in Knowledge Representation Systems , 1998, AAAI/IAAI.

[33]  Bernardo Cuenca Grau,et al.  Incremental Classification of Description Logics Ontologies , 2010, Journal of Automated Reasoning.

[34]  James A. Hendler,et al.  Swoop: A Web Ontology Editing Browser , 2006, J. Web Semant..

[35]  James A. Hendler,et al.  Debugging unsatisfiable classes in OWL ontologies , 2005, J. Web Semant..

[36]  Mica R. Endsley,et al.  Situation awareness global assessment technique (SAGAT) , 1988, Proceedings of the IEEE 1988 National Aerospace and Electronics Conference.

[37]  Michael D. Buhrmester,et al.  Amazon's Mechanical Turk , 2011, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[38]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.

[39]  Robert Stevens,et al.  Design insights for the next wave ontology authoring tools , 2014, CHI.