Reference ontologies — application ontologies: Either/or or both/and?
| Abstract | The distinction between reference ontologies and application ontologies crept rather unobtrusively into the recent literature on knowledge engineering. A lot of the discourse surrounding this distinction – notably, the one framing the workshop generating this collection of papers – suggests the two types of ontologies are in some sort of opposition to one another. Thus, Borge et al. [3] characterize reference ontologies (more recently, foundational ontologies) as rich, axiomatic theories whose focus is to clarify the intended meanings of terms used in specific domains. Application ontologies, by contrast, provide a minimal terminological structure to fit the needs of a specific community. Reflecting their minimal nature, Masolo et al. [7] refer to such ontologies as “lightweight” ontologies. An application ontology can be lightweight in a second respect as well, namely, that it may not necessarily take the form of fully-fledged axiomatic theory. Rather, it might only be a taxonomy of the relevant domain, a division of the domain into a salient collection of classes, perhaps ordered by the subclass relation. Importantly, though, for an application ontology to “fit the needs of a specific community” needn’t require representational accuracy. In the “worst” case (from a reference ontology perspective), to fit the needs of a community is just to represent uncritically what people in that community think about the ontology’s domain. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | No categories specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,672 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Only published papers are available at libraries |
Similar books and articlesGary H. Merrill (2010). Realism and Reference Ontologies: Considerations, Reflections, and Problems. Applied Ontology 5 (3-4):189-221.
Barbara Heller & Heinrich Herre (2004). Ontological Categories in GOL. Axiomathes 14 (1-3):57-76.
Sylvie Despres & Sylvie Szulman (2007). Merging of Legal Micro-Ontologies From European Directives. Artificial Intelligence and Law 15 (2):187-200.
Pepijn R. S. Visser & Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon (1998). A Comparison of Four Ontologies for the Design of Legal Knowledge Systems. Artificial Intelligence and Law 6 (1).
Barry Smith (2004). Beyond Concepts: Ontology as Reality Representation. In Formal Ontology in Information Systems (FOIS).
Daniel L. Rubin (2012). Finding the Meaning in Images: Annotation and Image Markup. Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology 18 (4).
Anand Kumar & Barry Smith (2003). The Unified Medical Language System and the Gene Ontology: Some Critical Reflections. In KI 2003: Advances in Artificial Intelligence.
Thomas Bittner & Barry Smith (2004). Normalizing Medical Ontologies Using Basic Formal Ontology. In Proceedings of GMDS 2004.
Barry Smith (2008). Ontology (Science). In Formal Ontology in Information Systems.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads8 ( #123,037 of 549,065 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,185 of 549,065 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
