The Community for Technology Leaders
RSS Icon
Issue No.11 - November (2009 vol.21)
pp: 1559-1572
Amal Zouaq , University Of Quebec at Montreal, Montreal
Roger Nkambou , University of Quebec at Montreal, Montreal
One of the goals of the Knowledge Puzzle Project is to automatically generate a domain ontology from plain text documents and use this ontology as the domain model in computer-based education. This paper describes the generation procedure followed by TEXCOMON, the Knowledge Puzzle Ontology Learning Tool, to extract concept maps from texts. It also explains how these concept maps are exported into a domain ontology. Data sources and techniques deployed by TEXCOMON for ontology learning from texts are briefly described herein. Then, the paper focuses on evaluating the generated domain ontology and advocates the use of a three-dimensional evaluation: structural, semantic, and comparative. Based on a set of metrics, structural evaluations consider ontologies as graphs. Semantic evaluations rely on human expert judgment, and finally, comparative evaluations are based on comparisons between the outputs of state-of-the-art tools and those of new tools such as TEXCOMON, using the very same set of documents in order to highlight the improvements of new techniques. Comparative evaluations performed in this study use the same corpus to contrast results from TEXCOMON with those of one of the most advanced tools for ontology generation from text. Results generated by such experiments show that TEXCOMON yields superior performance, especially regarding conceptual relation learning.
Concept learning, domain engineering, knowledge acquisition, ontology design.
Amal Zouaq, Roger Nkambou, "Evaluating the Generation of Domain Ontologies in the Knowledge Puzzle Project", IEEE Transactions on Knowledge & Data Engineering, vol.21, no. 11, pp. 1559-1572, November 2009, doi:10.1109/TKDE.2009.25
[1] H. Alani and C. Brewster, “Metrics for Ranking Ontologies,” Proc. Fourth Int'l EON Workshop held as part of the 15th Int'l World Wide Web Conf., 2006.
[2] L. Aroyo and D. Dicheva, “The New Challenges for E-Learning: The Educational Semantic Web,” Educational Technology Soc., vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 59-69, 2004.
[3] J. Brank, M. Grobelnik, and D. Mladenić, “A Survey of Ontology Evaluation Techniques,” Proc. Eighth Int'l Multi-Conf. Information Soc. IS-2005, 2005.
[4] C. Brewster, H. Alani, D. Dasmahapatra, and Y. Wilks, “Data Driven Ontology Evaluation,” Proc. Int'l Conf. Language Resources Evaluation (LREC), pp. 26-28, 2004.
[5] P. Buitelaar, D. Olejnik, and M. Sintek, “A Protégé Plug-In for Ontology Extraction from Text Based on Linguistic Analysis,” Proc. First European Semantic Web Symp. (ESWS), 2004.
[6] S. Cederberg and D. Widdows, “Using LSA and Noun Coordination Information to Improve the Precision and Recall of Automatic Hyponymy Extraction,” Proc. Conf. Natural Language Learning (CoNNL), 2003.
[7] P. Cimiano, “Ontology Learning and Population from Text,” PhD thesis, the Universität Karlsruhe (TH), 2006.
[8] P. Cimiano, J. Volker, and R. Studer, “Ontologies on Demand?—A Description of the State-of-the-Art, Applications, Challenges and Trends for Ontology Learning from Text,” Information, Wissenschaft und Praxis, vol. 57, nos. 6/7, pp. 315-320, Oct. 2006.
[9] P. Cimiano, A. Hotho, and S. Staab, “Comparing Conceptual, Partitional and Agglomerative Clustering for Learning Taxonomies from Text,” Proc. European Conf. Artificial Intelligence (ECAI '04), pp. 435-439, 2004.
[10] M.-C. De Marneffe, B. MacCartney, and C.D. Manning, “Generating Typed Dependency Parses from Phrase Structure Parses,” Proc. Fifth Conf. Language Resources Evaluation, pp. 449-454, 2006.
[11] E. Frank, G.W. Paynter, I.H. Witten, C. Gutwin, and C.G. Nevill-Manning, “Domain-Specific Key Phrase Extraction,” Proc. 16th Int'l Joint Conf. Artificial Intelligence, pp. 668-673, 1999.
[12] P. Hayes, T. Eskridge, R. Saavedra, T. Reichherzer, M. Mehrotra, and D. Bobrovnikoff, “Collaborative Knowledge Capture in Ontologies,” Proc. Third Int'l Conf. Knowledge Capture (K-CAP '05), pp. 99-106, 2005.
[13] M. Hearst, “Automatic Acquisition of Hyponyms from Large Text Corpora,” Proc. 14th Int'l Conf. Computational Linguistics, pp. 539-545, 1992.
[14] http:/, 2009.
[15] http:/, 2009.
[16] D. Klein and C.D. Manning, “Accurate Unlexicalized Parsing,” Proc. 41st Meeting Assoc. Computational Linguistics, pp. 423-430, 2003.
[17] D. Lin and P. Pantel, “Discovery of Inference Rules for Question Answering,” Natural Language Eng., vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 343-360, 2001.
[18] A. Lozano-Tello and A. Gomez-Perez, “Ontometric: A Method to Choose the Appropriate Ontology,” J. Database Management, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 1-18, 2004.
[19] A. Maedche and S. Staab, “Measuring Similarity between Ontologies,” Proc. Conf. Information and Knowledge Management (CIKM '02), vol. 2473, pp. 251-263, 2002.
[20] A. Maedche and S. Staab, “Ontology Learning for the Semantic Web,” IEEE Intelligent Systems, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 72-79, Mar./Apr. 2001.
[21] J.D. Novak and A.J. Cañas, “The Theory Underlying Concept Maps and How to Construct Them,” Technical Report IHMC CmapTools 2006-01, Florida Inst. for Human and Machine Cognition, 2006.
[22] M. Poesio and A. Almuhareb, “Identifying Concept Attributes Using a Classifier,” Proc. Assoc. Computational Linguistics (ACL) Workshop Deep Lexical Acquisition, pp. 18-27, 2005.
[23] R. Porzel and R. Malaka, “A Task-Based Approach for Ontology Evaluation,” Proc. European Conf. Artificial Intelligence (ECAI '04) Workshop Ontology Learning and Population, pp. 9-16, 2004.
[24] R. Rada, H. Mili, E. Bicknell, and M. Blettner, “Development and Application of a Metric on Semantic Nets,” IEEE Trans. Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 17-30, Jan./Feb. 1989.
[25] P. Resnik, “Semantic Similarity in a Taxonomy: An Information-Based Measure and Its Application to Problems of Ambiguity in Natural Language,” J. Artificial Intelligence Research, vol. 11, pp. 95-130, 1999.
[26] A. Schutz and P. Buitelaar, “RelExt: A Tool for Relation Extraction in Ontology Extension,” Proc. Fourth Int'l Semantic Web Conf., pp.593-606, 2005.
[27] SCORM (Sharable Content Object Reference Model),, Sept. 2007.
[28] M. Shamsfard and A. Barforoush, “The State of the Art in Ontology Learning: A Framework for Comparison,” Knowledge Eng. Rev., vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 293-316, 2003.
[29] , 2009.
[30] UIMA, http:/, Aug. 2007.
[31] J. Völker, P. Hitzler, and P. Cimiano, “Acquisition of OWL DL Axioms from Lexical Resources,” Proc. Fourth European Semantic Web Conf. (ESWC '07), pp. 670-685, 2007.
37 ms
(Ver 2.0)

Marketing Automation Platform Marketing Automation Tool