The MOUSE approach: Mapping Ontologies using UML for System Engineers

Authors

  • Seung-Hwa Chung Bennett University
  • Dr. Wei Tai School of Computer Science and Statistics,Trinity College Dublin
  • Prof. Declan O'Sullivan School of Computer Science and Statistics,Trinity College Dublin
  • Dr. Aidan Boran Bell Labs Ireland, Alcatel-Lucent.

Keywords:

System Engineers, UML, Semantic Data Integration, Ontology Mapping, Knowledge Engineering

Abstract

To address the problem of semantic heterogeneity, there has been a large body of research directed toward the study of semantic mapping technologies. Although various semantic mapping technologies have been investigated,  facilitating the process for domain experts to perform a semantic data integration task is still not easy. This is because one is required not only to possess domain expertise but also to have a good understanding of knowledge engineering. This paper proposes an approach that automatically transforms an abstract semantic mapping syntax into a concrete executable mapping syntax, we call this approach MOUSE (Mapping Ontologies using UML for System Engineers). In order to evaluate MOUSE, an implementation of this approach for a semantic data integration use case has been developed (called SDI, Semantic Data Integration). The aim is to enable domain experts, particularly system engineers, to undertake mappings using a technology that they are familiar with (UML), while ensuring the created mappings are accurate and the approach is easy to use. The proposed UML-based abstract mapping syntax is evaluated through usability experiments conducted in a lab environment by participants who have skills equivalent to real life system engineers using the SDI tool. Results from the evaluations show that the participants could correctly undertake the semantic data integration task using the MOUSE approach while maintaining accuracy and usability (in terms of ease of use).

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), “RDF/XML Syntax Specification (Revised)”, W3C Recommendation, http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/, 10 Feb. 2004.
[2] World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), “OWL Web Ontology Language Overview”, W3C Recommendation, http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/, 10 Feb. 2004.
[3] Thomas R. Gruber, “A Translation Approach to Portable Ontology Specifications”, Knowledge Acquisition, 5, pages 199-220, 1993.
[4] Dieter Fensel, “Ontologies: a silver bullet for knowledge management and electronic commerce”, Springer, Heidelberg (DE), 2nd edition, 2004.
[5] D. O‘Sullivan, V. Wade and D. Lewis, “Understanding as We Roam”, in IEEE Internet Computing, 11, DOI: 10.1109/MIC.2007.50, p26 - 33, 2007.
[6] H. Thomas, D. O‘Sullivan and R. Brennan, “Evaluation of Ontology Mapping Representations: a Pragmatic Evaluation”, In Workshop on Matching and Meaning, Part of the AISB 2009 Convention, April 9th 2009. Edinburgh, Scotland, 2009.
[7] P. Bouquet, M. Ehrig and J. Euzenat, “D2.2.1 Specification of a common framework for characterizing alignment”, http://www.inrialpes.fr/exmo/cooperation/kweb/heterogeneity/deli/kweb-221v1.pdf, 2005.
[8] S. Amrouch and S. Mostefai, “Survey on the literature of ontology mapping, alignment and merging”, In IEEE International conference on Information Technology and e-Services (ICITeS), pp. 1-5, 2012.
[9] Y. Kalfoglou and M. Schorlemmer, “Ontology Mapping: The State of The Art”, The Knowledge Engineering Review Journal (KER), DOI: 10.1017/S0269888903000651, 18(1):1-31, Dec. 2003.
[10] S. M. Falconer, N. F. Noy and M. A. D. Storey, “Ontology Mapping - a User Survey”, In Proceedings of the Workshop on Ontology Matching (OM 2007), ISWC/ASWC 2007, Busan, Korea, Nov. 2007.
[11] I. F. Cruz, C. Stroe and M. Palmonari, “Interactive User Feedback in Ontology Matching Using Signature Vectors”, In: Proc. of the 28th Int. Conference on Data Engineering, pp. 1321-1324, 2012.
[12] S. Falconer and M. A. Storey, “A cognitive support framework for ontology mapping”, In Processings of the 6th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC), pp. 114-127, 2007.
[13] Dale Miller, “Abstract Syntax and Logic Programming”, In Proceedings of the First and Second Russian Conferences on Logic Programming, pp. 322-337, Springer-Verlag LNAI 592, Irkutsk and St. Petersburg, Russia, 1992.
[14] F. Fondement and T. Baar, “Making Metamodels Aware of Concrete Syntax”, European Conference on Model Driven Architecture (ECMDA), LNCS 3748, pp. 190-204, 2005.
[15] E. Blomqvist and K. Sandkuhl, “Patterns in ontology engineering: Classification of ontology patterns”, In Proceedings of International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS), pp. 413-416, 2005.
[16] F. Scharffe and D. Fensel, “Correspondence Patterns for Ontology Alignment”, In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Knowledge Engineering (EKAW 2008), pp. 83-92, 2008.
[17] J. Keeney, A. Boran, I. Bedini, C. J. Matheus and P. F. Patel-Schneider, "Approaches to Relating and Integrating Semantic Data from Heterogeneous Sources", In Proceedings of The 2011 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conferences on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology (WI-IAT 2011), Lyon, France, 22-27 Aug. 2011.
[18] S. Bechhofer et al., "OWL Web Ontology Language Reference", W3C Recommendation, http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/, 10 Feb. 2004.
[19] I. Horrocks et al., "SWRL: A Semantic Web Rule Language Combining OWL and RuleML", W3C Member Submission, http://www.w3.org/Submission/SWRL/, 21 May. 2004.
[20] H. Boley, "The Rule Markup Initiative: Schema Specification of RuleML 1.0", http://ruleml.org/1.0/, Retrieved 09 Feb. 2011.
[21] World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), "SPARQL Query Language for RDF", W3C Recommendation, http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-sparql-query/, 15 Jan. 2008.
[22] World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), "Resource Description Framework (RDF): Concepts and Abstract Syntax", W3C Recommendation, http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/, 10 February 2004.
[23] J. Euzenat, "A format for ontology alignment", http://alignapi.gforge.inria.fr/format.html, Retrieved 09 Mar. 2010.
[24] Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative (OAEI), "Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative Campaign", http://oaei.ontologymatching.org/, 19 June 2012.
[25] J. Euzenat, "EDOAL: Expressive and Declarative Ontology Alignment Language", http://alignapi.gforge.inria.fr/edoal.html, Retrieved 13 May 2011.
[26] P. Bouquet, F. Giunchiglia, F. V. Harmelen, L. Serafini and H. Stuckenschmidt, "C-OWL: Contextualizing Ontologies", The Semantic Web - ISWC 2003, volume 2870 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS), pp. 164-179, FL, USA, Oct. 2003.
[27] JENA Apache incubator project, "SPARQL Syntax Expressions", http://openjena.org/wiki/SSE, Aug. 2011.
[28] M. J. O'Connor and A. Das, "SQWRL: a Query Language for OWL" OWL: Experiences and Directions (OWLED), 6th International Workshop, Chantilly, VA, 2009.
[29] World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), "The Rule Interchange Format", RIF Working Group, http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/RIF_Working_Group, Oct. 2010.
[30] Object Management Group (OMG), "Documents associated with Ontology Definition Metamodel (ODM) Version 1.0", http://www.omg.org/spec/ODM/1.0/, Released May 2009.
[31] I. Horrocks and P. F. Patel-Schneider, "Knowledge Representation and Reasoning on the Semantic Web: OWL." Handbook of Semantic Web Technologies, J. Domingue, D. Fensel and J. A. Hendler (Eds.), pp. 365-398, 2011.
[32] Object Management Group (OMG), "Object Constraint Language (OCL) - version 2.0", http://www.omg.org/spec/OCL/, Released May 2006.
[33] UML® Resource Page, “Unified Modeling Language”, http://www.uml.org, Retrieved Jul. 2011.
[34] P. Kogut, S. Cranefield, L. Hart, M. Dutra, K. Baclawski, M. Kokar and J. Smith, “UML for ontology development”, The Knowledge Engineering Review, 17 (1), pp. 61-64, 2002.
[35] D. Gasevic, D. Djuric, V. Devedzic and V. Damjanovi, “Converting UML to OWL ontologies”, In Proceedings of the 13th international World Wide Web conference on Alternate track papers and posters, New York, NY, USA, 19-21 May 2004.
[36] A. Boran, I. Bedini, C. Matheus, P. F. Patel-Schneider and J. Keeney, “A smart campus prototype for demonstrating the semantic integration of heterogeneous data”, In Web Reasoning and Rule Systems, pp. 238-243, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011.
[37] A. Boran, C. Matheus, I. Bedini and P. F. Patel-Schneider, “Empirical Analysis of Semantic Techniques applied to a Classification Problem involving Network Performance Data”, The 10th International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC), Bonn, Germany, 23-27 Oct. 2011.
[38] Alcatel-Lucent Femtocell Test bed, “http://www.alcatel-lucent.com”, Alcatel-Lucent 9360 Small Cell.
[39] World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), “RIF Core Dialect”, W3C Recommendation, http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-core/, 22 Jun. 2010.
[40] World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), “RIF RDF and OWL Compatibility”, W3C Recommendation, http://www.w3.org/TR/rif-rdf-owl/, 22 Jun. 2010.
[41] J. Brooke, "SUS: A quick and dirty usability scale", In B. T. P.W. Jordon, B. A. Weerdmeester and I. L. McClelland (Eds.), Usability evaluation in industry, pp. 189-194, London, England, 1996.
[42] J. Sauro, "Measuring usability with the System Usability Scale (SUS)", Retrieved from http://www.measuringusability.com/sus.php, 11 July 2011.

Published

2018-04-30

How to Cite

Chung, S.-H., Tai, D. W., O’Sullivan, P. D., & Boran, D. A. (2018). The MOUSE approach: Mapping Ontologies using UML for System Engineers. Computer Reviews Journal, 1(1), 8-29. Retrieved from https://purkh.com/index.php/tocomp/article/view/33

Issue

Section

Research Articles

Most read articles by the same author(s)