Modeling LMF compliant lexica in OWL-DL

Similar documents
RDF /RDF-S Providing Framework Support to OWL Ontologies

Comparison of Semantic Web serialization syntaxes

Short notes about OWL 1

Semantic Web Technologies: Web Ontology Language

Table of Contents. iii

DEVELOPING AN OWL ONTOLOGY FOR E- TOURISM

Semantic Technologies

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

Web Ontology Language: OWL

FOUNDATIONS OF SEMANTIC WEB TECHNOLOGIES

A Frame-based Resource Description Framework Expert System

Knowledge Representation RDF Turtle Namespace

Extracting Ontologies from Standards: Experiences and Issues

An RDF-based Distributed Expert System

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

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

Automatic Transformation of Relational Database Schema into OWL Ontologies

Chapter 2 AN INTRODUCTION TO THE OWL WEB ONTOLOGY LANGUAGE 1. INTRODUCTION. Jeff Heflin Lehigh University

Description Logic. Eva Mráková,

Integration of the Semantic Web with Meta Object Facilities

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

Web Ontology Language: OWL

The Semantic Web. Mansooreh Jalalyazdi

Appendix B: The LCA ontology (lca.owl)

An Introduction to the Semantic Web. Jeff Heflin Lehigh University

Chapter 4 Web Ontology Language: OWL

Web Ontology Language: OWL

LINKING BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Web Ontology Language: OWL by Grigoris Antoniou Frank van Harmelen

<?xml version='1.0' encoding='iso '?> <!DOCTYPE rdf:rdf [ <!ENTITY rdf ' <!

Bryan Smith May 2010

Ontological Modeling: Part 11

Ontological Modeling: Part 15

XML and Semantic Web Technologies. III. Semantic Web / 1. Ressource Description Framework (RDF)

Ontological Modeling: Part 14

SWAD-Europe Deliverable 8.1 Core RDF Vocabularies for Thesauri

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

Chapter 3 Research Method

Defining Several Ontologies to Enhance the Expressive Power of Queries

The Semantic Web. INF5100 Autumn 2007 Norun C. Sanderson

Towards a roadmap for standardization in language technology

Semantic Web. Ontology and OWL. Morteza Amini. Sharif University of Technology Fall 95-96

Knowledge Representation. Apache Jena Part II. Jan Pettersen Nytun, UiA

An Approach for Composing Web Services through OWL Kumudavalli.N Mtech Software Engineering

Easing the Definition of N Ary Relations for Supporting Spatio Temporal Models in OWL

Semantic Web Ontologies

INF3580/4580 Semantic Technologies Spring 2017

Chapter 13: Advanced topic 3 Web 3.0

FHIR RDF Sample side by side comparisons

Publishing OWL ontologies with Presto

INF3580 Semantic Technologies Spring 2012

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

TBX in ODD: Schema-agnostic specification and documentation for TermBase exchange

Genea: Schema-Aware Mapping of Ontologies into Relational Databases

The Semantic Web RDF, RDF Schema, and OWL (Part 2)

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

What is the Semantic Web?

2. RDF Semantic Web Basics Semantic Web

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

Tony Mallia Edmond Scientific

RuleML and SWRL, Proof and Trust

Developing markup metaschemas to support interoperation among resources with different markup schemas

NeCO: Ontology Alignment using Near-miss Clone Detection

Standards for language encoding: Sharing resources

ISO/TS TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION

RDF Schema. Mario Arrigoni Neri

SEMANTIC WEB AND COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF INFERENCE ENGINES

OWL & SPARQL - 웹정보시스템

Grounding OWL-S in SAWSDL

The ISO D approach

Racer - An Inference Engine for the Semantic Web

An Alternative CIM Modeling Approach using JSON-LD

Deep integration of Python with Semantic Web technologies

USING RELATIONAL MODEL TO STORE OWL ONTOLOGIES AND FACTS

The Semantic Web. What is the Semantic Web?

Semantic Information Retrieval: An Ontology and RDFbased

Chapter 4 OWL. Outline. A Brief History of OWL: SHOE. The OWL Family Tree

SADI Semantic Web Services

Semantic Web Lecture Part 4. Prof. Do van Thanh

Abstract. The report is written in english. Keywords: Linked Data, Clinical Data, Semantic Web, AstraZeneca, RDF, OWL, SPARQL, Jena

CSc 8711 Report: OWL API

Web Science & Technologies University of Koblenz Landau, Germany. RDF Schema. Steffen Staab. Semantic Web

Reasoning with Rules SWRL as Example. Jan Pettersen Nytun, UIA

ScadaOnWeb Web Based Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition

CHAPTER 4 Semantic Web Technologies

Semantic Web Fundamentals

OWL Full and UML 2.0 Compared

Semantic Web Engineering

Linked data basic notions!

Semantic Web. Part 3 The ontology layer 1: Ontologies, Description Logics, and OWL

Approach for Mapping Ontologies to Relational Databases

Limitations of the WWW

Helmi Ben Hmida Hannover University, Germany

Deriving OWL Ontologies from UML Models: an Enterprise Modelling Approach.

Web Data and Declarative Programming

Mustafa Jarrar: Lecture Notes on RDF Schema Birzeit University, Version 3. RDFS RDF Schema. Mustafa Jarrar. Birzeit University

Institute of Automatics AGH University of Science and Technology, POLAND. Hybrid Knowledge Engineering.

Semistructured Data Management Part 3 (Towards the) Semantic Web

Outline RDF. RDF Schema (RDFS) RDF Storing. Semantic Web and Metadata What is RDF and what is not? Why use RDF? RDF Elements

Schemas (documentation for 6.1)

Transcription:

19 21 June 11th International conference DIN Deutsches Institut für Normung e. V. Modeling LMF compliant lexica in OWL-DL Malek Lhioui 1, Kais Haddar 1 and Laurent Romary 2 1 : Multimedia, InfoRmation Systems and Advanced Computing Laboratory, Sfax, Tunisia 2 : Inria, Berlin, Germany

Motivation Ensuring interoperability across lexical representation frameworks Recent report called TAUS declared: The lack of interoperability costs the translation industry a fortune Fortune is spent to adjust data formats. Ontologies contribution in building such framework Information sharing and integrating Information description: provision of a clear semantic

Data modeling and ontologies Representing and managing the semantics of data formats Going beyond the capacities of existing schema language (typing, distance and contextual checking) Representing models and instances in a coherent way Making inferences on the structures Coherence control of data sources Data completion Comparison across heterogeneous sources or formats

General architecture Ontological modeling Logical classes and constraints Logical instances Tbox (terminological box) Abox (assertional box) XML data management XML documents

The LMF case ISO 24613:2008 Language resource management - Lexical markup framework (LMF) A semasiological meta-model for the representation of lexical data Complementary to TMF for terminological data Comes with a core package and extensions Morphological descriptions, syntactic constructs, semantics Provides a non-satisfactory XML serialization Great variation in LMF usages Large lexical projects work with the TEI

Objectives Automatic generation of ontologies for standardized lexical resources No resort to manual editing Preservation of lexical properties (attributes, cardinalities, relations ) Contribution to the building up of a lexical semantic web (cf. OntoLex initiative @ W3C) Application to the Arabic language Ontology construction for Arabic are very deficient Cf. Baccar et al. Existing LMF compliant Arabic lexical editor

Main technical aspects OWL-DL as the optimal modeling framework Good compromise between expressive power and inference capabilities (OWL-Lite, OWL full) Based on a sound logical background DL: description logics (cf. Ian Horrocks) Well defined (model theoretic) semantics Formal properties well understood (complexity, decidability) Known reasoning algorithms Implemented systems (highly optimised)

MODELING LMF IN OWL-DL

Transformation Prototype Basic entries Building OWL-DL Entities Used Namespaces Basic elements LMF Header and Classes LMF SubClasses Restrictions LMF Properties LMF Relations LMF Cardinalities

Building OWL-DL Entities W3C: the set of entities is usually said to constitute the signature of an ontology Simplifying some entries in OWL modeling <!DOCTYPE rdf:rdf[ <!ENTITY xsd "http://www.w3.org/2001/xmlschema#"> <!ENTITY owl "http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#"> <!ENTITY rdf "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdfsyntax-ns#"> <!ENTITY rdfs "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdfschema#"> ]>

Used Namespaces Non ambiguous ontology Deduced directly from entities <rdf:description xmlns:owl="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdfsyntax-ns#" xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf- Schema#" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/xmlschema#" xmlns:lmf="http://www.lexicalmarkupframework.org# ">

LMF Header and Classes Diagram <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <lexicalressource dtdversion="16"> <globalinformation> <feat att="languagecoding" val="iso 639-3"/> <feat att="scriptcoding" val="iso 15 924"/> </globalinformation> <lexicon> <feat att="language" val="arab"/> <lexicalentry morphologicalpatterns="intransitiveverb"> <feat att="partofspeech" val="verb"/> <feat att="root" val=" ( ja/la/ssa )س-ل-ج "/> <feat att="scheme" val=" </"( faala )فعل <lemma> <feat att="writtenform" val=" جلس (jalassa)"/> <feat att="writtenform" val="-"/> <feat att="type" </"( sahih )صحيح"= val </lemma> </lexicalentry> </lexicon> </lexicalressource> Exist Example: <owl:class rdf:about="&lmf;lexicon"/> No Input Verification Existence in LMF Classes Example: <owl:class /> Yes Add Class Add attribut rdf:about="&entity;in put "

LMF Classes: Automatic Generation in :Lexical Resource dtdversion="16" 1..* :Lexicon Language="arabic" 1 :Global Information languagecoding="iso 639-3" scriptcoding="iso 15 924" OWL-DL 1..* :Lexical Entry morphologicalpatterns="intransitiveverb" partofspeech="verb" ( jalassa )"س_ل_ج"= root ( faala )"فعل"= scheme 1 :Lemma "جلس"= writtenform (jalassa)»صحيح"= type (sahih) Hierarchical structure of the automatically built ontology Graphic structure of the automatic built ontology

LMF SubClasses Diagram Input: FormRepresentation <FormRepresentation> <feat att="writtenform" val="women"/> <feat att="grammaticalnumber" val="plural"/> </FormRepresentation> Output <owl:class rdf:about="&lmf;formrepresentation "> <rdfs:subclassof rdf:resource="&lmf;representation"/> </owl:class> Exist No Example: <owl:class rdf:id="&lmf;formrepresentation"/> Example: <rdfs:subclassof rdf:resource="&lmf;representation"/> Input Verification Existence in LMF SubClasses Yes Add Class + rdf:id="&entity;input " Add mother class + rdf:resource="&entity; motherclass"

LMF Properties Input <GlobalInformation> <feat att="languagecoding" val="iso 639-3"/> <feat att="scriptcoding" val="iso 15924"/> </GlobalInformation> Output <owl:datatypeproperty rdf:about="&lmf;languagecoding"> <rdfs:range rdf:resource="&xsd;string"/> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="&lmf;globalinformation"/> </owl:datatypeproperty> <owl:datatypeproperty rdf:about="&lmf;scriptcoding"> <rdfs:range rdf:resource="&xsd;string"/> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="&lmf;globalinformation"/> </owl:datatypeproperty> Exist No Input Verification Existence in LMF attributes Yes Add DatatypeProperty+ rdf:about="&entity;input " Add range + domain rdf:resource="&entity; range or domain"

:Lexical Resource dtdversion="16" 1..* :Lexicon Language="arabic" LMF attributes: : Automatic 1 Generation in OWL-DL :Global Information languagecoding="iso 639-3" scriptcoding="iso 15 924" 1..* :Lexical Entry morphologicalpatterns="intransitiveverb" partofspeech="verb" ( jalassa )"س_ل_ج"= root ( faala )"فعل"= scheme Data Properties 1 :Lemma "جلس"= writtenform (jalassa) صحيح"= type " (sahih)

LMF Relations Input Aggregation between Lexical Resource and Lexicon Output <owl:objectproperty rdf:about="&lmf;has_lexicon"> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="&lmf;lexicalresource"/> <rdfs:range rdf:resource="&lmf;lexicon"/> </owl:objectproperty> Exist Input Verification Existence in LMF aggregation Yes Add ObjectProperty+ rdf:about="&entity;input " Add range + domain rdf:resource="&entity; range or domain"

LMF Relations: : Automatic Generation :Lexical Resource dtdversion="16" 1..* :Lexicon Language="arabic" 1 :Global Information languagecoding="iso 639-3" scriptcoding="iso 15 924" in OWL-DL Object Properties 1..* :Lexical Entry morphologicalpatterns="intransitiveverb" partofspeech="verb" ( jalassa )"س_ل_ج"= root ( faala )"فعل"= scheme 1 :Lemma "جلس"= writtenform (jalassa) "صحيح"= type (sahih)

LMF Cardinalities Input Cardinalities between Lexical Resource and Lexicon Output <owl:class rdf:id="lexical Resource"> <owl:restriction> <owl:onproperty rdf:resource="#has a lexica"/> <owl:mincardinality rdf:datatype="&xsd; nonnegativeinteger">1</owl:mincardinality> </owl:restriction> </owl:class> No Exist Input Verification Existence in LMF cardinalities Yes Add Restriction Add onproperty + mincardinality rdf:resource="&entity; Input" rdf:datatype="&entity; type"

INSTANTIATION EXAMPLE

LMF Instantiation Input <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <lexicalressource dtdversion="16"> <globalinformation> <feat att="languagecoding" val="iso 639-3"/> <feat att="scriptcoding" val="iso 15 924"/> </globalinformation> <lexicon> <feat att="language" val="arab"/> <lexicalentry morphologicalpatterns="intransitiveverb"> <feat att="partofspeech" val="verb"/> <feat att="root" val=" ( ja/la/ssa )س-ل-ج "/> <feat att="scheme" val=" </"( faala )فعل <lemma> <feat att="writtenform" val=" جلس (jalassa)"/> <feat att="writtenform" val="-"/> <feat att="type" </"( sahih )صحيح"= val </lemma> </lexicalentry> </lexicon> </lexicalressource> No Exist Input Existence Verification instance Yes Add Individual + rdf:about="&entity;input " Add type + Data Properties + Object Properties assertions

Instantiation Example <owl:namedindividual rdf:about="lmfcoreontologies.owl#lexicon"> <rdf:type rdf:resource="lmfcoreontologies.owl#lexicon"/> <language rdf:datatype="&xsd;string">arabic</language> <has-lexicalentry rdf:resource="lmfcoreontologies.owl#kataba"/> </owl:namedindividual>

Instantiation Example (cont.) <!-- https://sites.google.com/site/aclglabo/outils/lmfontologies.owl#globalinformation --> <owl:namedindividual rdf:about="&lmfontologies;globalinformation"> <rdf:type rdf:resource="&lmfontologies;globalinformation"/> <scriptcoding rdf:datatype="&xsd;string">iso 15 924</scriptCoding> <languagecoding rdf:datatype="&xsd;string">iso 639-3</languageCoding> </owl:namedindividual> <!-- https://sites.google.com/site/aclglabo/outils/lmfontologies.owl#jalassa --> <owl:namedindividual rdf:about="&lmfontologies;jalassa"> <rdf:type rdf:resource="&lmfontologies;lexicalentry"/> <morphologicalpatterns rdf:datatype="&xsd;string">intransitiveverb</morphologicalpatterns> <partofspeech rdf:datatype="&xsd;string">verb</partofspeech> <root < root />س_ل_ج<" rdf:datatype="&xsd;string <scheme < scheme />فعل<" rdf:datatype="&xsd;string </owl:namedindividual>

:Lexical Resource dtdversion="16" 1..* :Lexicon Language="arabic" LMF Instantiation : : Automatic 1 Generation in OWL-DL :Global Information languagecoding="is O 639-3" scriptcoding="iso 15 924" Individuals 1..* :Lexical Entry morphologicalpatterns="intransitiveverb" partofspeech="verb" ( jalassa )"س_ل_ج"= root ( faala )"فعل"= scheme 1 :Lemma "جلس"= writtenform (jalassa) "صحيح"= type (sahih)

Conclusion and Perspectives Study the structure and representation of the LMF model Design an OWL-DL ontology that would be able to match its components maximally Make OWL-DL lexicons in any language easier to build Interoperable framework for the future developments modeling a family of interoperable formats