Converting a thesaurus into an ontology: the use case of URBISOC

Similar documents
New Dimensions in KOS

SKOS - Simple Knowledge Organization System

On practical aspects of enhancing semantic interoperability using SKOS and KOS alignment

Vocabulary Alignment for archaeological Knowledge Organization Systems

Main topics: Presenter: Introduction to OWL Protégé, an ontology editor OWL 2 Semantic reasoner Summary TDT OWL

A brief introduction to SKOS

A Semantic MediaWiki-Empowered Terminology Registry

Semantic Web Technologies: Web Ontology Language

A representation framework for terminological ontologies

Semantics. Matthew J. Graham CACR. Methods of Computational Science Caltech, 2011 May 10. matthew graham

Table of Contents. iii

Unified Thesaurus feasibility study

Report from the W3C Semantic Web Best Practices Working Group

SKOS. COMP62342 Sean Bechhofer

Ontologies SKOS. COMP62342 Sean Bechhofer

Copyright 2012 Taxonomy Strategies. All rights reserved. Semantic Metadata. A Tale of Two Types of Vocabularies

Copyright 2012 Taxonomy Strategies. All rights reserved. Semantic Metadata. A Tale of Two Types of Vocabularies

Mapping between Digital Identity Ontologies through SISM

Ontologies and The Earth System Grid

Application Services for Knowledge Organisation and System Integration

Terminologies, Knowledge Organization Systems, Ontologies

SKOS and the Ontogenesis of Vocabularies

Wondering about either OWL ontologies or SKOS vocabularies? You need both!

SWAD-Europe Deliverable 8.1 Core RDF Vocabularies for Thesauri

Taking a view on bio-ontologies. Simon Jupp Functional Genomics Production Team ICBO, 2012 Graz, Austria

Data Foundations & Terminology (DFT) WG/IG & VSIG

Terminology Services. Experimental Services for Controlled Vocabularies. OCLC Research April 2008

Study and guidelines on Geospatial Linked Data as part of ISA Action 1.17 Resource Description Framework

OWL and tractability. Based on slides from Ian Horrocks and Franz Baader. Combining the strengths of UMIST and The Victoria University of Manchester

Metadata Standards and Applications. 6. Vocabularies: Attributes and Values

The Semantic Web DEFINITIONS & APPLICATIONS

Content analysis and classification in mathematics

Metadata Common Vocabulary: a journey from a glossary to an ontology of statistical metadata, and back

Pattern-based design, part I

Migrating Thesauri to the Semantic Web Guidelines and case studies for generating RDF encodings of existing thesauri

Europeana Data Model. Stefanie Rühle (SUB Göttingen) Slides by Valentine Charles

Publishing Vocabularies on the Web. Guus Schreiber Antoine Isaac Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam

Semantic MediaWiki A Tool for Collaborative Vocabulary Development Harold Solbrig Division of Biomedical Informatics Mayo Clinic

Opus: University of Bath Online Publication Store

OWL a glimpse. OWL a glimpse (2) requirements for ontology languages. requirements for ontology languages

0.1 Knowledge Organization Systems for Semantic Web

Semantic Visualization for Subject Authority Data of Chinese Classified Thesaurus

SKOS Standards and Best Practises for USING Knowledge Organisation Systems ON THE Semantic Web

Semantiska webben DFS/Gbg

USING THE THESAURUS TO DEVELOP IT INQUIRY SYSTEMS

PROPOSAL TO REPRESENT THE UNESCO THESAURUS FOR THE SEMANTIC WEB APPLYING ISO-25964

PoolParty - Thesaurus Server

The AGROVOC Concept Scheme - A Walkthrough

Publishing Official Classifications in Linked Open Data

Vocabulary and Semantics in the Virtual Observatory

Semantic Technologies

KIWI Knowledge Model for Sun CEQ Use Case

Deep integration of Python with Semantic Web technologies

KDI OWL. Fausto Giunchiglia and Mattia Fumagallli. University of Trento

Semantic Web. Ontology Pattern. Gerd Gröner, Matthias Thimm. Institute for Web Science and Technologies (WeST) University of Koblenz-Landau

Library of Congress Controlled Vocabularies as Linked Data:

Library Technology Conference, March 20, 2014 St. Paul, MN

Agricultural bibliographic data sharing & interoperability in China

GraphOnto: OWL-Based Ontology Management and Multimedia Annotation in the DS-MIRF Framework

Pragmatics of RDF/OWL

OWL an Ontology Language for the Semantic Web

Semantic Web Ontologies

Linguaggi Logiche e Tecnologie per la Gestione Semantica dei testi

Semantic Interoperability Courses

Overview. Pragmatics of RDF/OWL. The notion of ontology. Disclaimer. Ontology types. Ontologies and data models

H1 Spring C. A service-oriented architecture is frequently deployed in practice without a service registry

UniSav UniSav. First Draft of requirements and specifications V F. André UniSav First release of the TMP

Pulling Together, or

Converting the TheSoz to SKOS Zapilko, Benjamin; Sure, York Veröffentlichungsversion / Published Version Arbeitspapier / working paper

Using metadata schema registry as a core function to enhance usability and reusability of metadata schemas

Classification and reference vocabulary in Linked Environment Data

Contents. G52IWS: The Semantic Web. The Semantic Web. Semantic web elements. Semantic Web technologies. Semantic Web Services

Modeling LMF compliant lexica in OWL-DL

Introduction and background

Semantic Web Company. PoolParty - Server. PoolParty - Technical White Paper.

The National Cancer Institute's Thésaurus and Ontology

Shared content-vocabularies: Ontologies

Ontology Summit2007 Survey Response Analysis. Ken Baclawski Northeastern University

Deliverable title: 8.7: rdf_thesaurus_prototype This version:

RDF Data Model. Objects

2 nd International Semantic Web Conference (ISWC2003)

Simplified Approach for Representing Part-Whole Relations in OWL-DL Ontologies

Thesauri managing and Software Agents: a proposed architecture

Knowledge Representation RDF Turtle Namespace

EARTh: an Environmental Application Reference Thesaurus in the Linked Open Data Cloud

Towards the reuse of standardized thesauri into ontologies 1

Innovation in Thesaurus Management

Semantic Web. Tahani Aljehani

12th ICCRTS. On the Automated Generation of an OWL Ontology based on the Joint C3 Information Exchange Data Model (JC3IEDM)

H1 Spring B. Programmers need to learn the SOAP schema so as to offer and use Web services.

FOUNDATIONS OF SEMANTIC WEB TECHNOLOGIES

Constantly Under Construction - STW Thesaurus for Economics Linked Data Maintenance

The Semantic Web and expert metadata: pull apart then bring together. Gordon Dunsire

Use of Ontology for production of access systems on Legislation, Jurisprudence and Comments

SWAD-Europe Deliverable 8.3: RDF Encoding of Multilingual Thesauri

Linking Thesauri to the Linked Open Data Cloud for Improved Media Retrieval

From the point of view of their expressiveness or

Managing semantics with content using DITA XML

Lessons Learned from a Greenhorn Ontologist

Knowledge-Driven Video Information Retrieval with LOD

Transcription:

Advanced Information Systems Laboratory Cost Action C2 Converting a thesaurus into an ontology: the use case of URBISOC J. Nogueras-Iso, J. Lacasta Alcalá de Henares, 4-5 May 2007 http://iaaa.cps.unizar.es Department of Computer Science and Systems Engineering

Outline. Motivation 2. Conversion into SKOS 3. Conversion into Towntology format 4. Conversion into OWL 5. Conclusions 2

. Motivation Definition of thesaurus a set of terms that describe the vocabulary of a controlled indexing language, formally organized so that the a priori relationships between concepts are made explicit (BT/NT, RT, TR, USE/UF, ) A term is a word or phrase that represents a conceptual category Traditionally used in digital libraries to improve precision and recall of information retrieval systems Provide a specialized vocabulary for the homogeneous classification of resources Supply users with a suitable vocabulary for the retrieval 3

Thesaurus vs ontology Ontology: explicit specification of a conceptualization Categorization of ontologies Linguistic/terminological ontologies (glossaries, controlled vocabularies, taxonomies, thesauri) Implementation-driven ontologies (conceptual schemas, knowledge bases) Formal ontologies Thesauri are ontologies (lexical ontologies) with weak semantics Semantic of relations results quite ambiguous RT, NT, BT, 4

Contribution of thesauri to development of formal ontologies They represent interesting source for the development of more formal ontologies Problem: there is no standardized representation for exchange There is no possibility to compare thesauri and detect commonalities Purpose of this presentation Conversion of thesauri into standardized representation This facilitates the comparison of ontologies the integration of concepts into formal ontologies 5

2. Conversion into SKOS Simple Knowledge Organisation System (SKOS) A W3C initiative for the representation of knowledge organization systems such as thesauri, classification schemes, subject heading lists, taxonomies, and other types of controlled vocabulary It provides a standard way to represent knowledge organisation systems using the Resource Description Framework (RDF) RDF encoding facilitates the interoperability of different computer applications using or sharing the same knowledge base It is becoming a de-facto standard 6

SKOS SKOS is a collection of 3 different RDF- Schema application profiles SKOS-Core store common properties and relations SKOS-Mapping describe relations between different KOS SKOS-Extension indicate specific relations and properties only contained in some type of KOS 7

SKOS-Core A KOS consists of a set of concepts (labelled as skos:concept) that are grouped by a concept scheme (skos:conceptscheme) Identified by means of a URI, it can be described with Dublin Core metadata The relation of the concept scheme with the most general concepts (top concepts) of the KOS is done through the skos:hastopconcept relation Each concept consists of a URI and a set of properties and relations to other concepts Concept properties skos.preflabel: label that better identifies a concept (for thesauri it must be unique) skos.altlabel: alternative label (synonyms or spelling variations of the preferred label) skos.scopenote: annotations about the ways to use a concept skos.definition: definition 8

SKOS-Core skos.example: examples of use in different languages skos.prefsymbol, skos.altsymbol: preferred or some alternative graphic symbols (e.g. graphical representation of a mathematical formula) skos.notation: representation of multiple encoding of concepts Concept relations skos:inscheme: to indicate the concept scheme including the concept skos.broader - skos.narrower: reciprocal relations to represent generalization-specialization relations skos.related: associative relationships between concepts indicating that two concepts are related in some way 9

SKOS-Core 0

URBISOC original format The alphabetical list of terms (http://pci204.cindoc.csic.es/tesauros/tes_ur ba/tes_urba.htm) is transformed into text files [ISO-2788 relationships + URI] ESPACIO NT CIUDADES NT PERCEPCION DEL ESPACIO NT TERRITORIO RT GEOGRAFIA URI http://pci204.cindoc.csic.es/tesauros/tes_urba/html/urb_e8.htm#espacio ESPACIO COTIDIANO BT CAMPO DE PERCEPCION URI http://pci204.cindoc.csic.es/tesauros/tes_urba/html/urb_e8.htm#espaciocotidiano ESPACIO EXTERIOR BT CAMPO DE PERCEPCION RT ESPACIO INTERIOR URI http://pci204.cindoc.csic.es/tesauros/tes_urba/html/urb_e8.htm#espacioexterior Espacio Forestal SYN ZONAS FORESTALES URI http://pci204.cindoc.csic.es/tesauros/tes_urba/html/urb_e8.htm#espacioforestal ESPACIO IMAGINARIO BT CAMPO DE PERCEPCION URI http://pci204.cindoc.csic.es/tesauros/tes_urba/html/urb_e8.htm#espacioimaginario

Mapping between URBISOC and SKOS skos:conceptscheme skos:preflabel skos:altlabel skos:scopenote 0.. 0..n 0..n 0.. lang lang lang lang 0..n skos:concept URI skos:definition broader narrower related skos:broader skos:narrower skos:related skos:altsymbol 0..n skos:prefsymbol 0.. 2

Example of SKOS generated file ESPACIO NT CIUDADES NT PERCEPCION DEL ESPACIO NT TERRITORIO RT GEOGRAFIA URI http://pci204.cindoc.csic.es/tesauros/tes_urba/html/urb_e8.htm#espacio... <rdf:description rdf:about="http://pci204.cindoc.csic.es/tesauros/tes_urba/html/urb_e8.htm#espacio"> <skos:related rdf:resource="http://pci204.cindoc.csic.es/tesauros/tes_urba/html/urb_g0.htm#geografia"/> <skos:narrower rdf:resource="http://pci204.cindoc.csic.es/tesauros/tes_urba/html/urb_p3.htm#percepciondelespa CIO"/> <skos:inscheme rdf:resource="http://pci204.cindoc.csic.es/tesauros/tes_urba/urbisoc"/> <skos:preflabel xml:lang="es">espacio</skos:preflabel> <skos:narrower rdf:resource="http://pci204.cindoc.csic.es/tesauros/tes_urba/html/urb_t.htm#territorio"/> <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#concept"/> <skos:narrower rdf:resource="http://pci204.cindoc.csic.es/tesauros/tes_urba/html/urb_c5.htm#ciudades"/> </rdf:description>.

SKOS format visualized through ThManager Open Source tool, http://thmanager.sourceforge.net/ 4

3. Conversion into Towntology Conversion from SKOS into Towntology format Details of the conversion The conversion is an adaptation from previous conversion (thesaurus -> SKOS) The main difference relies in the management of relationships SKOS defines strictly the types of available properties and relations Towntology format defines some properties but allows users to define new relationships In addition to the mapping between concepts, we need to define new relation types 5

Mapping between SKOS and Towntology DC skos:conceptscheme Ontology RelationType skos:preflabel skos:altlabel skos:scopenote skos:definition skos:broader skos:narrower skos:related skos:altsymbol 0.. 0..n 0..n 0.. 0..n lang lang lang lang broader 0..n skos:concept URI narrower related Head -Title -Language -Custodian -Last_Modif_Date * -RelationTypes Body -Relations Relation -Originator : Attribute -Insertion _Date : Attribute -Concept_Orig (Atrr: ID ) -Concept_Dest (Attr : ID) -Type (Attr : ID) -Properties (Attr : #empty, optional (true/false ))) * -ID : Attribute -Relation_Name -Relation_Def -Relation_Properties(Atrr : #empty, symmetric (true/false ), transitive (true, false ), maybeoptional (true/false )) -Concepts -Domains * * Domain -ID : Attribute -Domain_Name -Domain_Def Concept -ID : Attribute -Concept_Name -Concept_Domain (Attr : ID ) * Resource * Term -Terms * -ConceptDefs -Multimedia -URI -Resource _Description * -Terms ConceptDef -Originator : Attribute -Insertion _Date : Attribute -Concept_Def_Text ConceptDefSource -Ref * -Autors skos:prefsymbol 0.. ResourceSource -Ref -Autors Autor * 6

URBISOC with Towntology tool 7

4. Conversion into OWL Conversion from SKOS to OWL Web Ontology Language Created by the W3C Working Group Derived from DAML+OIL language Based on RDF 3 layers OWL Lite: extends RDF(S) and gathers the most common features of OWL Intended for users that only need to create class taxonomies and simple constraints OWL DL: includes the complete OWL vocabulary OWL Full: provides more flexibility than OWL 8

Main elements from OWL, classes Classes for defining classes and restrictions owl:class: specializes rdf:class owl:restriction: specializes owl:class and is used to define property restrictions for classes (number restrictions, existencial restrictions, ) Classes for defining properties owl:objectproperty: define properties that connect a class with antoher class owl:datatypeproperty: define properties to connect a class with a datatype Classes for defining inequality among individuals, enumerations of datatypes, predefined classes, describing ontologies, ontology versioning

Main elements from OWL, properties Properties for defining class expressions Conjunction (intersectionof), disjunction (unionof), negation (complementof) Collection of individuals (oneof) Property restrictions: name (onproperty) + o Value restriction (allvaluesfrom) o Existencial restriction (somevaluesfrom) o Role fillers (hasvalue) o Number restriction (cardinality, maxcardinality, mincardinality)

Details of conversion There isn t a real change of format SKOS is based on RDF OWL is based on RDF SKOS resources, properties and relation types are made to inherit from the structure of OWL SKOS instances don t change with the conversion 2

SKOS and OWL owl:class 2 * owl:objectproperty -domain : owl:class -range : owl:class skos:concept -Restriction :maxcardinality (skosbroader ) = -Restriction : minmaxcardinality )inscheme = -Restriction :maxcardinality (preflabel)= x lang -Restriction :maxcardinality (definition )= x lang -Restriction :maxcardinality (prefsymbol )= skos:concpetscheme -Restriction :mincardinality(hastopconcept )= -dcmetadata skos :semanticrelation -domain : skos :concept -range : skos :concept skos:hastopconcept -domain : skos :concpetscheme -range : skos :concept skos:inscheme -domain : skos :concept -range : skos :concpetscheme owl:datatypeproperty -domain : owl:class -range skos:related -SymmetricProperty skos:broader -TransitiveProperty -inverseof:skos :narrower skos:narrower -TransitiveProperty -inverseof:skos :broader skos :preflabel -domain : skos :concept -range : string -lang skos :altlabel -domain : skos :concept -range : string -lang skos :example -domain : skos :concept -range : string -lang skos:definition -domain : skos :concept -range : string -lang skos:scopenote -domain : skos :concept -range : string -lang skos :symbol -domain : skos :concept -range : URI skos:notation -domain : skos :concept -range : string -type skos:prefsymbol skos:altsymbol 22

OWL format visualized through Protegé 23

OWL format visualized through Protegé (II) 24

5. Conclusions URBISOC thesaurus available in different standardized formats, facilitating aligning, merging or other types of processing The process can be reused for other thesauri following the same structure Main part: analyzing the original structure of source format In SKOS and OWL representations each thesaurus concept/term is considered as an instance of a general Concept class Is this the right approach? Should we consider each concept/term as a separate class? The conversion to Towntology considers each concept/term as a separate class (no chance to include instances) Something in between? In general thesauri make no distinction between classes and individuals (NTIs are not frequent) 25

Possible future work Conversion of URBISOC into an OWL ontology Classes with well-defined meaning (not only skos:concept, ), properties and relations (not only BT, NT, ) Find patterns to specify better the meaning of relations: Partes de una Ciudad, Tipos arquitectónicos

Advanced Information Systems Laboratory http://iaaa.cps.unizar.es 27