Advertisement

Technology of Ontology Visualization Based on Cognitive Frames for Graphical User Interface

  • Pavel Lomov
  • Maxim Shishaev
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 394)

Abstract

This paper is dedicated to the issue of visualization of OWL ontologies to help their comprehension. In a previous work we showed a process of simplifying OWL ontologies by transforming them into a form called the User Presentation Ontology (UPO). In this paper we discuss some aspects of visual representation of ontologies for better understanding by human users. We present the approach of combining some UPO elements with special fragments called cognitive frames. It is expected that showing cognitive frames during visualization instead of just showing any terms linked with the chosen term will be more useful for ontology understanding. We determine some requirements for cognitive frames, define their types, and consider formal algorithms for constructing the frames.

Keywords

ontology semantic web ontology comprehension upper level ontology 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Acker, L., Porter, B.: Extracting viewpoints from knowledge bases. In: The 12th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 547–552 (1994)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alani, H.: TGVizTab: An Ontology Visualisation Extension for Protege, Knowledge Capture 03. In: Workshop on Visualizing Information in Knowledge Engineering, pp. 2–7 (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Averbukh, V.L.: Toward formal definition of conception adequacy in visualization. In: IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages, The Isle of Capri, Italy, pp. 46–47 (1997)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bauer, J.: Model exploration to support understanding of ontologies. Master thesis, Technische Universität Dresden (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bergh, J.R.: Ontology comprehension, University of Stellenbosch. Master Thesis (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bernardo, C.G., Horrocks, I., Motik, B., Parsia, B., Patel-Schneider, P.F., Sattler, U.: OWL 2: The next step for OWL. J. Web Sem. 6(4), 309–322 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bosca, A., Bonino, D., Pellegrino, P.: OntoSphere: More than a 3D ontology visualization tool. In: SWAP, The 2nd Italian Semantic Web Workshop (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cruse, D.: Lexical Semantics. University Press, Cambridge (1986)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cyc Ontology Guide: Introduction, http://www.cyc.com/ (retrieved)
  10. 10.
    Ellson, J., Gansner, E., Koutsofios, L., North, S.C., Woodhull, G.: Graphviz - open source graph drawing tools. In: Mutzel, P., Jünger, M., Leipert, S. (eds.) GD 2001. LNCS, vol. 2265, pp. 483–484. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gangemi, A., Navigli, R., Velardi, P.: The OntoWordNet project: extension and axiomatisation of conceptual relations in wordnet. In: International Conference on Ontologies, Databases and Applications of Semantics, Catania, Italy (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gerstl, P., Pribennow, S.: A conceptual theory of part-whole relations and its applications. Data and Knowledge Engineering 20, 305–322 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Grenon, P.: Spatio-temporality in Basic Formal Ontology: SNAP and SPAN, Upper-Level Ontology, and Framework for Formalization: PART I. IFOMIS Report 05/2003, Institute for Formal Ontology and Medical Information Science (IFOMIS), University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Guarino, N., Welty, C.: A Formal Ontology of Properties. In: Dieng, R., Corby, O. (eds.) EKAW 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1937, pp. 97–112. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Herre, H.: General Formal Ontology (GFO): A Foundational Ontology for Conceptual Modelling. In: Theory and Applications of Ontology: Computer Applications, pp. 297–345 (2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hoehndorf R. What is an upper level ontology?, http://ontogenesis.knowledgeblog.org/740 (retrieved)
  17. 17.
    Johnson-Laird, P.N.: Mental Models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference and consciousness. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1983)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Katifori, A., Halatsis, C., Lepouras, G., Vassilakis, C., Giannopoulou, E.: Ontology visualization methods: A survey. ACM Computing Surveys 39(4), 10 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lomov, P.A.: OWL-ontology transformation for visualization and use as a basis of the user interface. In: Lomov, P.A., Shishaev, M.G., Dikovitskiy, V.V. (eds.) Scientific Magazine ”Design Ontology”, pp. 49–61. Novaya Tehnika, Samara (2012) (in Russian) ISSN 2223-9537Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Masolo, C., Borgo, S., Gangemi, A., Guarino, N., Oltramari, A., Shneider, L.: WonderWeb. Final Report. Deliverable D18 (2003)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Miller, G.A.: The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review 63(2), 81–97 (1956)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Minsky, M.: A Framework for Representing Knowledge. In: Winston, P.H. (ed.) The Psychology of Computer Vision. McGraw-Hill, New York (1975)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Motschnig-Pitrik, R., Kaasboll, J.: Part-Whole Relationship Categories and their Application in Object-Oriented Analysis. IEEE TSE 11(5), 779–797 (1999)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Niles, I., Pease, A.: Towards a Standard Upper Ontology. In: The 2nd International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems, Ogunquit, Maine, pp. 17–19 (2001)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System Reference, W3C Recommendation (2009), http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference (retrieved)
  26. 26.
    Valkman, J.R.: Cognitive graphic metaphors. In: International Conference Znaniya-Dialog-Resheniye, Yalta, pp. 261–272 (1995) (in Russian)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Winston, M., Chaffin, R., Herrmann, D.: A Taxonomy of Part-Whole Relations. Cognitive Science 11, 417–444 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zybin, V.E.: Graphic and text forms of the specification of difficult managing directors of algorithms: irreconcilable opposition or cooperation? In: The 7th International Conference on Electronic Publications, Novosibirsk, pp. 32–45 (2003) (in Russian)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pavel Lomov
    • 1
  • Maxim Shishaev
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Informatics and Mathematical Modeling of Technological Processes of the Kola Science Center RASEstablishment of Russian Academy of SciencesRussia

Personalised recommendations