Skip to main content

Towards a Symptom Ontology for Semantic Web Applications

  • Conference paper
The Semantic Web – ISWC 2004 (ISWC 2004)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 3298))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

As the use of Semantic Web ontologies continues to expand there is a growing need for tools that can validate ontological consistency and provide guidance in the correction of detected defects and errors. A number of tools already exist as evidenced by the ten systems participating in the W3C’s evaluation of the OWL Test Cases. For the most part, these first generation tools focus on experimental approaches to consistency checking, while minimal attention is paid to how the results will be used or how the systems might interoperate. For this reason very few of these systems produce results in a machine-readable format (for example as OWL annotations) and there is no shared notion across the tools of how to identify and describe what it is that makes a specific ontology or annotation inconsistent. In this paper we propose the development of a Symptom Ontology for the Semantic Web that would serve as a common language for identifying and describing semantic errors and warnings that may be indicative of inconsistencies in ontologies and annotations; we refer to such errors and warnings as symptoms. We offer the symptom ontology currently used by the ConsVISor consistency-checking tool, as the starting point for a discussion on the desirable characteristics of such an ontology. Included among these characteristics are 1) a hierarchy of common symptoms, 2) clear associations between specific symptoms and the axioms of the languages they violate and 3) a means for relating individual symptoms back to the specific constructs in the input file(s) through which they were implicated. We conclude with a number of suggestions for future directions of this work including its extension to syntactic symptoms.

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

Access this chapter

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 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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. W3C Recommendation, OWL Web Ontology Language Overview (February 2004), http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/

  2. W3C, OWL Test Results Page (March 2004), http://www.w3.org/2003/08/owl-systems/test-results-out

  3. European OntoWeb Consortium, A Survey of Ontology Tools (May 2002), http://ontoweb.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/About/Deliverables/D13_v1-0.zip

  4. InfoEther & BBN Technologies, SemWebCentral Validation Tools Assessment, http://semwebcentral.org/assessment/report?type=category&category=Validation

  5. Baclawski, K., Kokar, M., Waldinger, R., Kogut, P.: Consistency Checking of Semantic Web Ontologies. In: Horrocks, I., Hendler, J. (eds.) ISWC 2002. LNCS, vol. 2342, pp. 454–459. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Versatile Information Systems, Inc., ConsVISor, http://www.vistology.com/consvisor/

  7. AGFA, Euler, http://www.agfa.com/w3c/euler/

  8. UMBC, FOWL, http://fowl.sourceforge.net

  9. University of Maryland Institute for Advanced Computer Studies, Pellet, http://www.mindswap.org/2003/pellet/

  10. BBN, vOWLidator, http://owl.bbn.com/validator/

  11. DAML, DARPA Agent Markup Language, http://www.daml.org/

  12. W3C, OWL Test Cases (February 2004), http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-test/

  13. W3C Recommendation, OWL Web Ontology Language Semantics and Abstract Syntax (February 2004), http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-semantics/

  14. W3C Recommendation, OWL Web Ontology Language Overview (February 2004), http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/

  15. Berners-Lee, T., Hendler, J., Lassila, O.: The Semantic Web: A new form of Web content that is meaningful to computers will unleash a revolution of new possibilities. Scientific American (May 2001)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2004 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Baclawski, K., Matheus, C.J., Kokar, M.M., Letkowski, J., Kogut, P.A. (2004). Towards a Symptom Ontology for Semantic Web Applications. In: McIlraith, S.A., Plexousakis, D., van Harmelen, F. (eds) The Semantic Web – ISWC 2004. ISWC 2004. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3298. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30475-3_45

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-30475-3_45

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-23798-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-30475-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics