Ontology evaluation using wikipedia categories for browsing

Subscribe (Full Service)


	Search: The ACM Digital Library The Guide

	Feedback

Ontology evaluation using wikipedia categories for browsing

Full text

Pdf (244 KB)

Source

Conference on Information and Knowledge Management archive
Proceedings of the sixteenth ACM conference on Conference on information and knowledge management table of contents

Lisbon, Portugal

SESSION: Explanation, knowledge provenance and synthesis (KM) table of contents

Pages 223-232

Year of Publication: 2007

ISBN:978-1-59593-803-9

Authors

Jonathan Yu	RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia
James A. Thom	RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia
Audrey Tam	RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia

Sponsors

SIGIR: ACM Special Interest Group on Information Retrieval
SIGWEB: ACM Special Interest Group on Hypertext, Hypermedia, and Web
ACM: Association for Computing Machinery

Publisher

ACM New York, NY, USA

Bibliometrics

Downloads (6 Weeks): 19, Downloads (12 Months): 188, Citation Count: 3

Additional Information:

abstract references cited by index terms collaborative colleagues

Tools and Actions:	Request Permissions Review this Article Save this Article to a Binder Display Formats: BibTeX EndNote ACM Ref

DOI Bookmark:	Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1321440.1321474 What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Ontology evaluation is a maturing discipline with methodologies and measures being developed and proposed. However, evaluation methods that have been proposed have not been applied to specific examples. In this paper, we present the state-of-the-art in ontology evaluation - current methodologies, criteria and measures, analyse appropriate evaluations that are important to our application - browsing in Wikipedia, and apply these evaluations in the context of ontologies with varied properties. Specifically, we seek to evaluate ontologies based on categories found in Wikipedia.

REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

	1	R. Baeza-Yates and B. Ribeiro-Neto. Modern Info. Retrieval. ACM Press / Addison-Wesley, 1999.
	2	C. Brewster, H. Alani, S. Dasmahapatra, and Y. Wilks. Data driven ontology evaluation. In Proc. of Intl. Conf. on Lang. Resources and Eval., Lisbon, Portugal, 2004. European Lang. Resources Assoc.
	3	J. S. Dong , C. H. Lee , H. B. Lee , Y. F. Li , H. Wang, A combined approach to checking web ontologies, Proceedings of the 13th international conference on World Wide Web, May 17-20, 2004, New York, NY, USA [doi>10.1145/988672.988770]
	4	A. Gangemi, C. Catenacci, M. Ciaramita, and J. Lehmann. Ontology evaluation and validation. Technical report, Lab. for Applied Ontology, 2005.
	5	A. Gómez-Pérez. Towards a framework to verify knowledge sharing technology. Expert Systems With Applications, 11(4):519--529, 1996.
	6	A. Gómez-Pérez. Evaluation of ontologies. Intl. Journal of Intelligent Systems, 16:391--409, 2001.
	7	Thomas R. Gruber, A translation approach to portable ontology specifications, Knowledge Acquisition, v.5 n.2, p.199-220, June 1993 [doi>10.1006/knac.1993.1008]
	8	Thomas R. Gruber, Toward principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, v.43 n.5-6, p.907-928, Nov./Dec. 1995 [doi>10.1006/ijhc.1995.1081]
	9	M. Grüninger and M. Fox. Methodology for the design and evaluation of ontologies. In Workshop on Basic Ontological Issues in Knowledge Sharing, IJCAI '95, 1995.
	10	N. Guarino. Some ontological principles for designing upper level lexical resources. In Proc. of the 1st Intl. Conf. on Lexical Resources and Evaluation, May 1998.
	11	Nicola Guarino , Christopher Welty, Evaluating ontological decisions with OntoClean, Communications of the ACM, v.45 n.2, February 2002 [doi>10.1145/503124.503150]
	12	Alexander Maedche , Steffen Staab, Measuring Similarity between Ontologies, Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management. Ontologies and the Semantic Web, p.251-263, October 01-04, 2002
	13	Gary Marchionini, Information seeking in electronic environments, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, 1995
	14	D. L. McGuinness. Spinning the Semantic Web: Bringing the World Wide Web to Its Full Potential, chapter 6: Ontologies Come of Age, pages 171--195. MIT Press, 2002.
	15	S. Tartir, I. Arpinar, M Moore, A. Sheth, and B. Aleman-Meza. Ontoqa: Metric-based ontology quality analysis. In Autonomous, Semantically Heterogeneous Data and Knowledge Sources, 2005.
	16	R. H. Thompson , W. B. Croft, Support for browsing in an intelligent text retrieval system, International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, v.30 n.6, p.639-668, June 1989
	17	M. Uschold and M. Grüninger. Ontologies: Principles, methods and applications. Knowledge Engineering Review, 11(2):93--155, 1996.
	18	J. Yu, J. A. Thom, and A. Tam. Evaluating ontology criteria for requirements in a geographic travel domain. In Proc. of Intl. Conf. on Ontologies, DataBases and Applications of Semantics, 2005.
	19	Ying Zhao , George Karypis , Usama Fayyad, Hierarchical Clustering Algorithms for Document Datasets, Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, v.10 n.2, p.141-168, March 2005 [doi>10.1007/s10618-005-0361-3]

CITED BY 3

	Anne-Marie Vercoustre , James A. Thom , Jovan Pehcevski, Entity ranking in Wikipedia, Proceedings of the 2008 ACM symposium on Applied computing, March 16-20, 2008, Fortaleza, Ceara, Brazil
	Andreas Pesenhofer , Sonja Edler , Helmut Berger , Michael Dittenbach, Towards a patent taxonomy integration and interaction framework, Proceeding of the 1st ACM workshop on Patent information retrieval, October 30-30, 2008, Napa Valley, California, USA
	Jonathan Yu , James A. Thom , Audrey Tam, Requirements-oriented methodology for evaluating ontologies, Information Systems, v.34 n.8, p.686-711, December, 2009