Developing SBVR Vocabularies and Business Rules from OWL2 Ontologies

  • Gintare Bernotaityte
  • Lina Nemuraite
  • Rita Butkiene
  • Bronius Paradauskas
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 403)


Semantics of Business Vocabulary and Business Rules (SBVR) is OMG adopted metamodel allowing defining noun concepts, verb concepts and business rules of a problem domain in structured natural language based on formal logics. SBVR business vocabulary and business rules are capable of representing ontologies. There are some research works devoted to transforming SBVR into Web Ontology Language OWL2. The reverse way of representing ontology concepts with SBVR structured language was not investigated though there are much more ontologies than SBVR vocabularies. Our research is concentrated on methodology for creating SBVR vocabularies and rules from OWL2 ontologies without a loss of the expressive power, characteristic for ontologies, as some ontology-specific concepts have no direct representation in SBVR. The particular attention is devoted to applying SBVR vocabulary in semantic search.


SBVR OWL 2 business vocabulary business rules domain ontology lexical ontology 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    OMG. Semantics of Business Vocabulary and Business Rules (SBVR). SBVR 1.1 RTF Convenience document. OMG Document Number: dtc/2012-06-10, pp. 1–436 (2012) Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    W3C. OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Structural Specification and Functional-Style Syntax. In: Motik, B., Patel-Schneider, P.F., Parsia, B. (eds.) W3C Recommendation, October 27, vol. 134, pp. 1–134 (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    El Ghali, A., Chniti, A., Citeau, H.: Bringing OWL ontologies to the Business Rules Users. In: Bikakis, A., Giurca, A. (eds.) RuleML 2012. LNCS, vol. 7438, pp. 62–76. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sukys, A., Nemuraite, L., Paradauskas, B., Sinkevičius, E.: Transformation framework for SBVR based semantic queries in business information systems. In: Bustech 2012: the Second International Conference on Business Intelligence and Technology, Nice, France, July 22-27, pp. 1–6. IARIA (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sukys, A., Nemuraite, L., Paradauskas, B.: Representing and transforming SBVR question patterns into SPARQL. In: Skersys, T., Butleris, R., Butkiene, R. (eds.) ICIST 2012. CCIS, vol. 319, pp. 436–451. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lin, F., Sandkuhl, K.: A Survey of Exploiting WordNet in Ontology Matching. In: Bramer, M. (ed.) Artificial Intelligence in Theory and Practice II. IFIP, vol. 276, pp. 341–350. Springer, Boston (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    WordNet: A lexical database for English,
  8. 8.
    VerbNet: A Class-Based Verb Lexicon,
  9. 9.
    Baker, C.F., Fillmore, C.J., Lowe, J.B.: The Berkeley FrameNet Project. In: COLING 1998 Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, vol. 1, pp. 86–90 (1998)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dzikovska, M.O., Swifty, M.D., Allen, J.F.: Building a computational lexicon and ontology with FrameNet. In: Fillmore, C.J., et al. (eds.) LREC, Lisbon, pp. 53–60 (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kendall, E., Linehan, M.H.: Mapping SBVR to OWL2. IBM Research Report, RC25363, WAT1303-040 (2013)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Collibra Data Governance Software,
  13. 13.
    ONTORule Project: ONTOlogies meet Business RULEs,
  14. 14.
    Karpovic, J., Nemuraite, L., Stankeviciene, M.: Requirements for Semantic Business Vocabularies and Rules for Transforming Them into Consistent OWL2 Ontologies. In: Skersys, T., Butleris, R., Butkiene, R. (eds.) ICIST 2012. CCIS, vol. 319, pp. 420–435. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nemuraite, L., Skersys, T., Sukys, A., Sinkevičius, E., Ablonskis, L.: VETIS tool for editing and transforming SBVR business vocabularies and business rules into UML&OCL models. In: Targamadze, A., Butleris, R., Butkiene, R. (eds.) Information Technologies 2010: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Information and Software Technologies, IT 2010, Kaunas, Lithuania, April 21-23, vol. 384, pp. 377–384 (2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cimiano, P., Buitelaar, P., McCrae, J., Sintek, M.: LexInfo: A Declarative Model for the Lexicon-Ontology Interface. Journal Web Semantics: Science, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 9(1), 29–51 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rector, A.L.: Modularisation of Domain Ontologies Implemented in Description Logics and related formalisms including OWL. In: K-CAP 2003, pp. 121–128. ACM, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Declerck, T., Gromann, D.: Combining three Ways of Conveying Knowledge: Modularization of Domain, Terminological, and Linguistic Knowledge in Ontologies. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Modular Ontologies, Graz, Austria, CEUR-WS, Aachen. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 875, pp. 28–40 (2012)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    The Definition of Sekinefs Extended Named Entities,
  20. 20.
    Kargioti, E., Konopoulos, E., Bassiliades, N.: OntoLife: An Ontology for Semantically Managing Personal Information. In: Iliadis, L., Maglogiannis, I., Tsoumakas, G., Vlahavas, I., Bramer, M. (eds.) Artificial Intelligence Applications and Innovations III. IFIP AICT, vol. 296, pp. 127–133. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Brickley, D., Miller, L.: FOAF Vocabulary Specification 0.98 (2010),
  22. 22.
    Nemuraite, L., Paradauskas, B.: A methodology for engineering OWL 2 ontologies in practise considering their semantic normalisation and completeness. Electronics and Electrical Engineering 4(120), 89–94 (2012)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
  24. 24.
    Kaneiwa, K., Iwazume, M., Fukuda, K.: An upper ontology for event classifications and relations. In: Orgun, M.A., Thornton, J. (eds.) AI 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4830, pp. 394–403. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Scherp, A., Franz, T., Saathoff, C., Staab, S.: F-A Model of Events based on the Foundational Ontology DOLCE+DnS Ultralite. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Knowledge Capture (K-CAP), California, pp. 137–144 (2009)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Motik, B., Patel-Schneider, P.F., Parsia, B.: OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Structural Specification and Functional-Style Syntax. W3C Proposed Recommendation (September 22, 2009)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gintare Bernotaityte
    • 1
  • Lina Nemuraite
    • 1
  • Rita Butkiene
    • 1
  • Bronius Paradauskas
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Information SystemsKaunas University of TechnologyKaunasLithuania

Personalised recommendations