Ontology Personalization: An Approach Based on Conceptual Prototypicality

With the current emergence of Cognitive Sciences and the development of Knowledge Management applications in Social and Human Sciences, Subjective Knowledge becomes an unavoidable subject and a real challenge, which must be integrated and developed in Ontology Engineering and Ontology-based Information Retrieval. This paper introduces a new approach dedicated to the Personalization of a Domain Ontology. Inspired by works in Cognitive Psychology, our work is based on a process which aims at capturing the user-sensitive degree of truth of the categorisation process, that is the one which is really perceived by the end-user. Practically, this process consists in decorating the Specialisation/Generalisation links (i.e. the ISA links) of the hierarchy of concepts with a specific gradient. As this gradient is defined according to the three aspects of the semiotic triangle (i.e. intensional, extensional and expressional dimension), we call it Semiotic-based Prototypicality Gradient. It enrichs the initial formal semantics of an ontology by adding a pragmatics defined according to a context of use which depends on parameters like culture, educational background and/or emotional context of the end-user.

[1]  Karen Z. H. Li,et al.  Predicting memory completeness and accuracy: emotion and exposure in repeated autobiographical recall , 2001 .

[2]  C. Kloesel,et al.  The essential Peirce : selected philosophical writings , 1992 .

[3]  Peirce Edition Peirce Edition,et al.  The Essential Peirce: Selected Philosophical Writings (1893-1913) , 1998 .

[4]  E. Rosch Cognitive reference points , 1975, Cognitive Psychology.

[5]  Mariano Fernández-López,et al.  Ontological Engineering , 2003, Encyclopedia of Database Systems.

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

[7]  Asunción Gómez-Pérez,et al.  Ontological Engineering: With Examples from the Areas of Knowledge Management, e-Commerce and the Semantic Web , 2004, Advanced Information and Knowledge Processing.

[8]  M. Banaji,et al.  Mood and heuristics: the influence of happy and sad states on sensitivity and bias in stereotyping. , 2000, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[9]  F. G. Crookshank,et al.  The meaning of meaning : a study of the influence of language upon thought and of the science of symbolism , 1924 .

[10]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[11]  Ho-fung Leung,et al.  Formalizing typicality of objects and context-sensitivity in ontologies , 2006, AAMAS '06.

[12]  Douglas L. Nelson,et al.  Category Name and Instance Norms for 106 Categories of Various Sizes , 1982 .

[13]  Diederik Aerts,et al.  Toward an Ecological Theory of Concepts , 2008, 0803.2567.

[14]  Ho-fung Leung,et al.  Ontology with Likeliness and Typicality of Objects in Concepts , 2006, ER.

[15]  Nicola Guarino,et al.  Formal ontology, conceptual analysis and knowledge representation , 1995, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[16]  Charles S. Peirce,et al.  The essential Peirce , 1992 .

[17]  Mario Mikulincer,et al.  Anxiety and categorization—1. The structure and boundaries of mental categories , 1990 .

[18]  Philip Resnik,et al.  Using Information Content to Evaluate Semantic Similarity in a Taxonomy , 1995, IJCAI.

[19]  David W. Embley,et al.  Conceptual Modeling - ER 2006, 25th International Conference on Conceptual Modeling, Tucson, AZ, USA, November 6-9, 2006, Proceedings , 2006, ER.