INVENTIVE Evaluating PSI Ontologies by Mapping to the Common Sense - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
INVENTIVE Evaluating PSI Ontologies by Mapping to the Common Sense Natalya KEBERLE Zaporozhye National Uni, Ukraine Vadim ERMOLAYEV Zaporozhye National Uni, Ukraine Wolf-Ekkehard MATZKE Cadence Design Systems GmbH, Germany May 24, 2007,
Natalya KEBERLE Zaporozhye National Uni, Ukraine Vadim ERMOLAYEV Zaporozhye National Uni, Ukraine Wolf-Ekkehard MATZKE Cadence Design Systems GmbH, Germany
May 24, 2007, Kharkiv, Ukraine
May 24, 2007 2 Evaluation of PSI Ontologies by Mapping to the Common Sense
– Why, What and How-To?
– PSI Ontologies Suite, reasons for evaluation of PSI ontologies
– What is Common Sense – Sources
– PSI Meta – Mapping to upper level ontologies – Good mappings = close to common sense?
May 24, 2007 3 Evaluation of PSI Ontologies by Mapping to the Common Sense
conceptualization [Gruber 1993]
It reflects the subjective views of its creators (knowledge engineers, domain experts etc)
knowledge
May 24, 2007 4 Evaluation of PSI Ontologies by Mapping to the Common Sense
Making swing: strengthened wooden board, reliable ropes
May 24, 2007 5 Evaluation of PSI Ontologies by Mapping to the Common Sense
Making swing: strengthened wooden board, reliable ropes
“strengthen” “reliable” 1 “reliable” 2 Ambiguity in terms … …wrong (and costly) solutions
May 24, 2007 6 Evaluation of PSI Ontologies by Mapping to the Common Sense
Conceptual modeling Usage of representation languages Suitability of the model w.r.t. a domain and use cases Suitability of the implemented model w.r.t. a domain and use cases Ontology engineering process
May 24, 2007 7 Evaluation of PSI Ontologies by Mapping to the Common Sense
– Logical correctness of an ontology as a formal theory
– Set of predefined criteria, domain standards, requirements
– Tagging of domain documents
– Plug the ontology into an application and evaluate results
– Standard ontology required => well established domains
– Structural, functional metrics, usability
May 24, 2007 8 Evaluation of PSI Ontologies by Mapping to the Common Sense
Performance Assessment and Management
– E.g., PRODUKTIV+ project (German Federal Ministry
– VCAD, Cadence Design Systems, GmbH – Dept of Cybernetics and Gerstner Lab, Czech Technical Uni – CERTICON Corp. – Intelligent Systems Research Group, Zaporozhye National Uni
May 24, 2007 9 Evaluation of PSI Ontologies by Mapping to the Common Sense
May 24, 2007 10 Evaluation of PSI Ontologies by Mapping to the Common Sense
The high-level structure of the PSI and PRODUKTIV+ Ontologies Suite. White packages represent the Core. Colored packages are the Extensions
May 24, 2007 11 Evaluation of PSI Ontologies by Mapping to the Common Sense
Conceptual modeling Usage of representation languages Suitability of the model w.r.t. a domain and use cases Suitability of the implemented model w.r.t. a domain and use cases Ontology engineering process
May 24, 2007 12 Evaluation of PSI Ontologies by Mapping to the Common Sense
– Logical correctness of an ontology as a formal theory => Use it
– Set of domain standards, requirements => no established standards => No
– Tagging of domain documents => documents are unstructured => No
– Plug the ontology into an application and evaluate results => => no applications yet => No
– Standard ontology required => Use Common Sense
– Structural, functional metrics, usability => May Be in Future
May 24, 2007 13 Evaluation of PSI Ontologies by Mapping to the Common Sense
sense in their theory
– OpenCYC, SUMO, DOLCE, BFO, OCRHE,… but not so much
– High level of abstraction in formalized common sense
May 24, 2007 14 Evaluation of PSI Ontologies by Mapping to the Common Sense
– Suggested Upper Merged Ontology (SUMO) – WordNet – Descriptive Ontology for Linguistic and Cognitive Engineering (DOLCE) – Basic Formal Ontology (BFO) – Object-Centered High-Level Reference Ontology (OCHRE)
– Only to DOLCE – Via WordNet to SUMO
May 24, 2007 15 Evaluation of PSI Ontologies by Mapping to the Common Sense
domain concepts
DesignArtifact’s upward cotopies are
May 24, 2007 16 Evaluation of PSI Ontologies by Mapping to the Common Sense
almost all PSI concepts with their natural language semantics
instances in one semantic network – has benefited from harmonization with WordNet
May 24, 2007 17 Evaluation of PSI Ontologies by Mapping to the Common Sense
hierarchy of upper-level concepts
instead WordNet is “sweetened” with DOLCE
May 24, 2007 18 Evaluation of PSI Ontologies by Mapping to the Common Sense
is not the same:
– WordNet+SUMO is good in Processes, various Parameters – DOLCE is good in Abilities/Beliefs of Actor, in Tasks, in Descriptions
– Manual work
underdevelopment of upper-level ontologies
May 24, 2007 19 Evaluation of PSI Ontologies by Mapping to the Common Sense
– Is must-have for many real-world intelligent applications
– Is hard, often manual, process
– May be checked against the Common Sense as a “golden standard”
– May influence both “golden standard” and domain ontology
May 24, 2007 20 Evaluation of PSI Ontologies by Mapping to the Common Sense
dimensions
May 24, 2007 21 Evaluation of PSI Ontologies by Mapping to the Common Sense
Resources:
PSI: http://ermolayev.com/ISRG/ISRG-projects-PSI.htm E-paper: http://ermolayev.com/eva_personal/PS/PSI-ISTA-07_CR.pdf This presentation: http://ermolayev.com/eva_personal/PS/ISTA-2007-PSI-to-CommonSense.pdf