Building Wordnet Based Ontologies with Expert Knowledge

  • Jacek MarciniakEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9561)


The article presents the principles of creating wordnet based ontologies which represent general knowledge about the world as well as specialist expert knowledge. Ontologies of this type are a new method of organizing lexical resources. They possess a wordnet structure expanded by domain relations and synsets ascribed to hierarchical structures representing general domain and local-context conceptualizations. Ontologies of this type are handy tools for indexers and searchers working on massive content resources such as internet services, repositories of digital images or e-learning repositories.


Wordnet based ontologies Indexing and searching resources 


  1. 1.
    Dextre Clarke, S.G., Lei Zeng, M.: From ISO 2788 to ISO 25964: the evolution of thesaurus standards towards interoperability and data modeling. ISO Inf. Stand. Q. Winter 24 (2012)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fellbaum, C. (ed.): WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database. MIT Press, Cambridge (1998)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gangemi, A., Guarino, N., Masolo, C., Oltramari, A.: Sweetening WordNet with Dolce. AI Mag. 24(3), 13–24 (2003)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Getty AAT: About the AAT. Accessed December 2015
  5. 5.
    Hodge, G.: Systems of knowledge organization for digital libraries. Beyond traditional authority files, Council on Library and Information Resources (2000). Accessed December 2015
  6. 6.
    Hjørland, B.: Is classification necessary after Google? J. Documentation 68(3), 299–317 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Iconclass RKD, web site of IconClass. Accessed December 2015
  8. 8.
    Lakoff, G.: Women, fire, and dangerous things: what categories reveal about the mind. University of Chicago Press (1987)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lancaster, F.W.: Indexing and Abstracting in Theory and Practice. 3rd edn. University of Illinois, Graduate School of Library and Information Science, Champaign (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Maniez, J.: Database merging and the compatibility of indexing languages. Knowl. Organ. 24(4), 213–224 (1997)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Marciniak, J.: Building e-learning content repositories to support content reusability. Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Learn. (iJET) 9(3), 45–52 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Marciniak, J.: Building intelligent tutoring systems immersed in repositories of e-learning content. Procedia Comput. Sci. 35, 541–550 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Marciniak, J.: Enhancing tagging systems by Wordnet based ontologies. In: Vetulani, Z., Mariani, J. (eds.) LTC 2011. LNCS, vol. 8387, pp. 367–378. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Seidel-Grzesińska, A., Stanicka-Brzezicka, K.: Wielojęzyczne słowniki hierarchiczne w dokumentacji muzealnej w Polsce. Muzealnictwo 55, 116–126 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Slavic, A.: A definition of thesauri and classification as indexing tools. Metadata Dublin Core (2000). Accessed December 2015
  16. 16.
    Smith, G.: Tagging: People-Powered Metadata for the Social Web. New Riders, Berkeley (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vossen, P. (ed.): Euro WordNet General Document. Version 3. University of Amsterdam (2002)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Vetulani, Z., Walkowska, J., Obrębski, T., Marciniak, J., Konieczka, P., Rzepecki, P.: An algorithm for building lexical semantic network and its application to PolNet - Polish WordNet Project. In: Vetulani, Z., Uszkoreit, H. (eds.) LTC 2007. LNCS, vol. 5603, pp. 369–381. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Mathematics and Computer ScienceAdam Mickiewicz UniversityPoznańPoland

Personalised recommendations