Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

OntoDebug: Interactive Ontology Debugging Plug-in for Protégé

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Foundations of Information and Knowledge Systems (FoIKS 2018)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 10833))

Abstract

Applications of semantic systems require their users to design ontologies that correctly formalize knowledge about a domain. In many cases factors such as insufficient understanding of a knowledge representation language, problems concerning modeling techniques and granularity, or inability to foresee all implications of formulated axioms result in faulty ontologies.

Debugging tools help to localize faults in ontologies by finding explanations of discrepancies between the actual ontology and the intended one. In this paper we present OntoDebug – a plug-in for the currently most popular open-source ontology editor Protégé – that implements an interactive approach to ontology debugging. Given a faulty ontology and a specification of requirements to the intended ontology, encoded as a set of test cases, our tool finds a set of faulty axioms explaining the problem. In case the user provides a set of test cases that does not allow for the computation of a unique explanation, OntoDebug is able to collect the missing information by asking the user a sequence of automatically generated questions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    An ontology \(\mathcal {O} \) is coherent iff there do not exist any unsatisfiable classes in \(\mathcal {O} \). A class X is unsatisfiable in an ontology \(\mathcal {O} \) iff, for each interpretation \(\mathcal {I}\) of \(\mathcal {O} \), \(X^{\mathcal {I}} = \emptyset \). See also [17, Definitions 1 and 2].

  2. 2.

    The source code and documentation is available at https://git-ainf.aau.at/interactive-KB-debugging/debugger.

  3. 3.

    Please note that our OntoDebug Plug-In is still in the development phase and that changes regarding its described look & feel or functionality enhancements might still be incorporated in the future.

  4. 4.

    This ontology can be loaded from bookmarks in Open from URL... menu of Protégé.

References

  1. Baader, F., Peñaloza, R.: Axiom pinpointing in general tableaux. J. Log. Comput. 20(1), 5–34 (2010)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Ceraso, J., Provitera, A.: Sources of error in syllogistic reasoning. Cogn. Psychol. 2(4), 400–410 (1971)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Friedrich, G., Shchekotykhin, K.: A general diagnosis method for ontologies. In: Gil, Y., Motta, E., Benjamins, V.R., Musen, M.A. (eds.) ISWC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3729, pp. 232–246. Springer, Heidelberg (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/11574620_19

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  4. Horridge, M.: Justification based explanation in ontologies. Ph.D. thesis, University of Manchester (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Horridge, M., Parsia, B., Sattler, U.: Laconic and precise justifications in OWL. In: Sheth, A., Staab, S., Dean, M., Paolucci, M., Maynard, D., Finin, T., Thirunarayan, K. (eds.) ISWC 2008. LNCS, vol. 5318, pp. 323–338. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-88564-1_21

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Johnson-Laird, P.N.: Deductive reasoning. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 50, 109–135 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Junker, U.: QUICKXPLAIN: preferred explanations and relaxations for over-constrained problems. In: AAAI 2004, vol. 3, pp. 167–172 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Kalyanpur, A., Parsia, B., Horridge, M., Sirin, E.: Finding all justifications of OWL DL entailments. In: Aberer, K., et al. (eds.) ASWC/ISWC -2007. LNCS, vol. 4825, pp. 267–280. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-76298-0_20

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Kalyanpur, A., Parsia, B., Sirin, E., Grau, B.C., Hendler, J.A.: Swoop: a web ontology editing browser. J. Web Semant. 4(2), 144–153 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. de Kleer, J., Williams, B.C.: Diagnosing multiple faults. Artif. Intell. 32(1), 97–130 (1987)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Korf, R.E.: A complete anytime algorithm for number partitioning. Artif. Intell. 106(2), 181–203 (1998)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  12. Lehmann, J., Bühmann, L.: ORE - a tool for repairing and enriching knowledge bases. In: Patel-Schneider, P.F., Pan, Y., Hitzler, P., Mika, P., Zhang, L., Pan, J.Z., Horrocks, I., Glimm, B. (eds.) ISWC 2010. LNCS, vol. 6497, pp. 177–193. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-17749-1_12

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Marques-Silva, J., Janota, M., Belov, A.: Minimal sets over monotone predicates in Boolean formulae. In: Sharygina, N., Veith, H. (eds.) CAV 2013. LNCS, vol. 8044, pp. 592–607. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39799-8_39

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Motik, B., Shearer, R., Horrocks, I.: Hypertableau reasoning for description logics. J. Artif. Intell. Res. 36, 165–228 (2009)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Musen, M.A., The Protégé Team: The protégé project: a look back and a look forward. AI Matters 1(4), 4–12 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Parsia, B., Sirin, E., Kalyanpur, A.: Debugging OWL ontologies. In: Proceedings of 14th international conference on WWW, pp. 633–640. ACM (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Qi, G., Hunter, A.: Measuring incoherence in description logic-based ontologies. In: Aberer, K., et al. (eds.) ASWC/ISWC -2007. LNCS, vol. 4825, pp. 381–394. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-76298-0_28

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Rector, A., Drummond, N., Horridge, M., Rogers, J., Knublauch, H., Stevens, R., Wang, H., Wroe, C.: OWL pizzas: practical experience of teaching OWL-DL: common errors & common patterns. In: Motta, E., Shadbolt, N.R., Stutt, A., Gibbins, N. (eds.) EKAW 2004. LNCS, vol. 3257, pp. 63–81. Springer, Heidelberg (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30202-5_5

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Reiter, R.: A Theory of diagnosis from first principles. Artif. Intell. 32(1), 57–95 (1987)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Rodler, P.: Interactive debugging of knowledge bases. Ph.D. thesis, Alpen-Adria Universität Klagenfurt (2015). http://arxiv.org/pdf/1605.05950v1.pdf

  21. Rodler, P.: On active learning strategies for sequential diagnosis. In: 28th International Workshop on Principles of Diagnosis (DX 2017). Kalpa Publications in Computing, vol. 4, pp. 264–283. EasyChair (2018). https://easychair.org/publications/paper/zHgj

  22. Rodler, P., Schekotihin, K.: Reducing model-based diagnosis to knowledge base debugging. In: 28th International Workshop on Principles of Diagnosis (DX 2017). Kalpa Publications in Computing, vol. 4, pp. 284–296. EasyChair (2018). https://easychair.org/publications/paper/3g9Q

  23. Rodler, P., Schmid, W., Schekotihin, K.: Inexpensive cost-optimized measurement proposal for sequential model-based diagnosis. In: 28th International Workshop on Principles of Diagnosis (DX 2017). Kalpa Publications in Computing, vol. 4, pp. 200–218. EasyChair (2018). https://easychair.org/publications/paper/HhPf

  24. Rodler, P., Shchekotykhin, K., Fleiss, P., Friedrich, G.: RIO: minimizing user interaction in ontology debugging. In: Faber, W., Lembo, D. (eds.) RR 2013. LNCS, vol. 7994, pp. 153–167. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39666-3_12

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Roussey, C., Corcho, O., Vilches-Blázquez, L.M.: A catalogue of OWL ontology antipatterns. In: International Conference on Knowledge Capture, pp. 205–206. ACM, Redondo Beach (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Schlobach, S., Cornet, R.: Non-standard reasoning services for the debugging of description logic terminologies. In: IJCAI-2003, Proceedings of 18th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Acapulco, Mexico, 9–15 August 2003, pp. 355–362. Morgan Kaufmann (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Schlobach, S., Huang, Z., Cornet, R., Harmelen, F.: Debugging incoherent terminologies. J. Autom. Reason. 39(3), 317–349 (2007)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  28. Shchekotykhin, K.M., Friedrich, G., Fleiss, P., Rodler, P.: Interactive ontology debugging: two query strategies for efficient fault localization. J. Web Semat. 12, 88–103 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Shchekotykhin, K.M., Friedrich, G., Rodler, P., Fleiss, P.: Sequential diagnosis of high cardinality faults in knowledge-bases by direct diagnosis generation. In: ECAI 2014–21st European Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, vol. 263, pp. 813–818. IOS Press (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Shchekotykhin, K.M., Jannach, D., Schmitz, T.: Mergexplain: fast computation of multiple conflicts for diagnosis. In: Proceedings of 24th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, IJCAI 2015, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 25–31 July 2015, pp. 3221–3228. AAAI Press (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Sirin, E., Parsia, B., Grau, B.C., Kalyanpur, A., Katz, Y.: Pellet: a practical OWL-DL reasoner. Web Semant.: Sci. Serv. Agents World Wide Web 5(2), 51–53 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Struss, P.: Model-based problem solving. In: Handbook of Knowledge Representation, Foundations of Artificial Intelligence, vol. 3, pp. 395–465. Elsevier (2008)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Alpen-Adria-Universität, Klagenfurt, Austria

    Konstantin Schekotihin, Patrick Rodler & Wolfgang Schmid

Authors
  1. Konstantin Schekotihin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Patrick Rodler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Wolfgang Schmid
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Konstantin Schekotihin .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Software Competence Center Hagenberg, Hagenberg im Mühlkreis, Austria

    Flavio Ferrarotti

  2. Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria

    Stefan Woltran

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Schekotihin, K., Rodler, P., Schmid, W. (2018). OntoDebug: Interactive Ontology Debugging Plug-in for Protégé. In: Ferrarotti, F., Woltran, S. (eds) Foundations of Information and Knowledge Systems. FoIKS 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10833. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90050-6_19

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90050-6_19

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-90049-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-90050-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation