A Framework for Understanding and Classifying Ontology Applications

In1 this paper, we draw attention to common goals and supporting technologies of several relatively distinct communities to facilitate closer cooperation and faster progress. The common thread is the need for sharing the meaning of terms in a given domain, which is a central role of ontologies. The different communities include ontology research groups, software developers and standards organizations. Using a broad definition of ‘ontology’, we show that much of the work being done by those communities may be viewed as practical applications of ontologies. To achieve this, we present a framework for understanding and classifying ontology applications. We identify three main categories of ontology applications: 1) neutral authoring, 2) common access to information, and 3) indexing for search. In each category, we identify specific ontology application scenarios. For each, we indicate their intended purpose, the role of the ontology, the supporting technologies and who the principal actors are and what they do. We illuminate the similarities and differences between scenarios. The copyright of this paper belongs to the papers authors. Permission to copy without fee all or part of this material is granted provided that the copies are not made or distributed for direct commercial advantage. Proceedings of the IJCAI-99 workshop on Ontologies and Problem-Solving Methods (KRR5) Stockholm, Sweden, August 2, 1999 (V.R. Benjamins, B. Chandrasekaran, A. Gomez-Perez, N. Guarino, M. Uschold, eds.) http://sunsite.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/Publications/CEUR-WS/Vol-18/ 1The order of authors was determined by a coin flip.

[1]  Henrik Eriksson,et al.  Reusable ontologies, knowledge-acquisition tools, and performance systems: PROTÉGÉ-II solutions to Sisyphus-2 , 1996, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[2]  Robert M. MacGregor,et al.  Building and (re)using an ontology of air campaign planning , 1999, IEEE Intell. Syst..

[3]  ValenteAndre,et al.  Building and (Re)Using an Ontology of Air Campaign Planning , 1999 .

[4]  Thomas R. Gruber,et al.  A translation approach to portable ontology specifications , 1993, Knowl. Acquis..

[5]  Kathleen O'Neil Lossau,et al.  Knowledge Base Discovery Tool , 1999, AAAI/IAAI.

[6]  Jintae Lee,et al.  The PIF Process Interchange Format and Framework PIF Working Group , 1994 .

[7]  Thomas A. Bruce,et al.  Designing Quality Databases With IDEF1X Information Models , 1991 .

[8]  Mark S. Fox,et al.  The Logic of Enterprise Modelling , 1996 .

[9]  Keith E. Williamson,et al.  Ontology reuse and application , 1998 .

[10]  Monica Riley,et al.  EcoCyc : Encyclopedia of E . coli Genes and , 1999 .

[11]  Ivar Jacobson,et al.  Object-oriented software engineering - a use case driven approach , 1993, TOOLS.

[12]  Keith E. Williamson,et al.  Formally specifying engineering design rationale , 1997, Proceedings 12th IEEE International Conference Automated Software Engineering.

[13]  Michael Uschold,et al.  The Enterprise Ontology , 1998, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[14]  Michael Grüninger,et al.  The Process Interchange Format and Framework , 1998, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[15]  Michael Uschold,et al.  Knowledge level modelling: concepts and terminology , 1998, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[16]  G. A. Lenkova,et al.  TO THE PAPER , 2022 .

[17]  Gregory R. Olsen,et al.  An Ontology for Engineering Mathematics , 1994, KR.

[18]  M. Musen,et al.  - 1-When Knowledge Models Collide ( How it Happens and What to Do ) , 1998 .

[19]  Nicola Guarino,et al.  OntoSeek: Using Large Linguistic Ontologies for Accessing On-Line Yellow Pages and Product Catalogs , 1999 .

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

[21]  Douglas A. Schenck,et al.  Information modeling: the EXPRESS way , 1994 .