1 / 40

Ontologies Come of Age

Ontologies Come of Age. Deborah L. McGuinness Associate Director and Senior Research Scientist Knowledge Systems Laboratory Stanford University Stanford, CA 94305 650-723-9770 dlm@ksl.stanford.edu. What is an Ontology?. General Description Logics. Thesauri “narrower term” relation.

andrew
Download Presentation

Ontologies Come of Age

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Ontologies Come of Age Deborah L. McGuinness Associate Director and Senior Research Scientist Knowledge Systems Laboratory Stanford University Stanford, CA 94305 650-723-9770 dlm@ksl.stanford.edu

  2. What is an Ontology? General Description Logics Thesauri “narrower term” relation Formal taxonomy Frames (properties) Catalog/ ID Term Hierarchy (e.g. Yahoo!) Formal instance General Logic Terms/ glossary Value Restrs. *based on AAAI ’99 Ontologies panel – Gruninger, Lehmann, McGuinness, Uschold, Welty Updated by McGuinness, additional input from Gruninger, Uschold, and Rockmore McGuinness - Mitre

  3. General Nature of Descriptions class a WINE superclass a LIQUID a POTABLE grape: chardonnay, ... [>= 1] sugar-content: dry, sweet, off-dry color: red, white, rose price: a PRICE winery: a WINERY grape dictates color (modulo skin) harvest time and sugar are related general categories number/card restrictions structured components Roles/ properties value restrictions interconnections between parts McGuinness - Mitre

  4. Some uses of Ontologies Simple ontologies (taxonomies) provide: • Controlled shared vocabulary (search engines, authors, users, databases, programs/agents all speak same language) • Site Organization, Navigation Support, Expectation setting • “Umbrella” Upper Level Structures (for extension e.g., UNSPSC) • Browsing support (tagged structures such as Yahoo!) • Search support (query expansion approaches such as FindUR, e-Cyc) • Sense disambiguation (e.g., TAP) McGuinness - Mitre

  5. FindUR Architecture Content to Search: CLASSIC Knowledge Representation System Research Site Technical Memorandum Calendars (Summit 2005, Research) Yellow Pages (Directory Westfield) Newspapers (Leader) Internal Sites (Rapid Prototyping) AT&T Solutions Worldnet Customer Care Medical Information Content (Web Pages or Databases Content Classification Domain Knowledge Domain Knowledge Search Technology: Search Engine Verity (and topic sets) GUI supporting browsing and selection Collaborative Topic Set Tool User Interface: Verity SearchScript, Javascript, HTML, CGI, CLASSIC Results (standard format) Results (domain specific) McGuinness - Mitre

  6. McGuinness - Mitre

  7. McGuinness - Mitre

  8. McGuinness - Mitre

  9. McGuinness - Mitre

  10. Uses of Ontologies II • Consistency Checking • Completion • Interoperability Support • Support for validation and verification testing (e.g. http://ksl.stanford.edu/projects/DAML/chimaera-jtp-cardinality-test1.daml ) • Configuration support • Structured, “surgical” comparative customized search • Generalization / Specialization • … Foundation for expansion and leverage McGuinness - Mitre

  11. KSL Wine AgentSemantic Web Integration • Wine Agent receives a meal description and retrieves a selection of matching wines available on the Web, using an ensemble of emerging standards and tools: • DAML+OIL / OWL for representing a domain ontology of foods, wines, their properties, and relationships between them • JTP theorem prover for deriving appropriate pairings • DQL for querying a knowledge base consisting of the above • Inference Web for explaining and validating the response • [Web Services for interfacing with vendors] • Utilities for conducting and caching the above transactions McGuinness - Mitre

  12. McGuinness - Mitre

  13. Processing • Given a description of a meal, • Use DQL to state a premise (the meal) and query the knowledge base for a suggestion for a wine description or set of instances • Use JTP Theorem Prover to deduce answers (and proofs) • Use Inference Web to explain results (descriptions, instances, provenance, reasoning engines, etc.) • Access relevant web sites (wine.com, wine commune, …) to access current information • Use DAML-S for markup and protocol* http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/projects/wine/explanation.html McGuinness - Mitre

  14. McGuinness - Mitre

  15. McGuinness - Mitre

  16. Querying multiple online sources McGuinness - Mitre

  17. A Few Observations about Ontologies • Simple ontologies can be built by non-experts • Verity’s Topic Editor, Collaborative Topic Builder, GFP, Chimaera, Protégé, OIL-ED, etc. • Ontologies can be semi-automatically generated • from crawls of site such as yahoo!, amazon, excite, etc. • Semi-structured sites can provide starting points • Ontologies are exploding (business pull instead of technology push) • e-commerce - MySimon, Amazon, Yahoo! Shopping, VerticalNet, … • Controlled vocabularies (for the web) abound - SIC codes, UMLS, UNSPSC, Open Directory (DMOZ), Rosetta Net, SUMO • Business interest expanding – ontology directors, business ontologies are becoming more complicated (roles, value restrictions, …), VC firms interested, • Markup Languages growing XML, RDF, DAML, RuleML, xxML • “Real” ontologies are becoming more central to applications • Search companies moving towards them – Yahoo, recently Google McGuinness - Mitre

  18. McGuinness - Mitre

  19. McGuinness - Mitre

  20. Implications and Needs for Ontology-enhanced applications • Ontology Language Syntax and Semantics (DAML+OIL, OWL) • Upper Level/Core ontologies for reuse (Cyc, SUMO, CNS coalition, DAML-S…) • Environments for Creation of Ontologies (Protégé, Sandpiper, Construct, OilEd, …) • Environments for Maintenance of Ontologies (Chimaera, OntoBuilder, …) • Reasoning Environments (Cerebra, Fact, JTP, Snark, …) • Distributed explanation support (Inference Web) • Training (Conceptual Modeling, reasoning usage, tutorials – OWL Guide, Ontologies 101, OWL Tutorial, …) McGuinness - Mitre

  21. Discussion/Conclusion • Ontologies are exploding; core of many applications • Business “pull” is driving ontology language tools and languages • New generation applications need more expressive ontologies and more back end reasoning • New generation users (the general public) need more support than previous users of KR&R systems • Distributed ontologies need more support: merging, analysis, explanation support, incompleteness techniques, versioning, etc. • Scale and distribution of the web force mind shift • Everyone is in the game – US Government (DARPA, NSF, NIST, ARDA…), EU, W3C, consortiums, business, … • Consulting and product companies are in the space (not just academics) This is THE time for ontology work!!! McGuinness - Mitre

  22. Pointers • Selected Papers: • McGuinness. Ontologies come of age, 2003 • Das, Wei, McGuinness, Industrial Strength Ontology Evolution Environments, 2002. • Kendall, Dutra, McGuinness. Towards a Commercial Strength Ontology Development Environment, 2002. • McGuinness Description Logics Emerge from Ivory Towers, 2001. • McGuinness. Ontologies and Online Commerce, 2001. • McGuinness. Conceptual Modeling for Distributed Ontology Environments, 2000. • McGuinness, Fikes, Rice, Wilder. An Environment for Merging and Testing Large Ontologies, 2000. • Brachman, Borgida, McGuinness, Patel-Schneider. Knowledge Representation meets Reality, 1999. • McGuinness. Ontological Issues for Knowledge-Enhanced Search, 1998. • McGuinness and Wright. Conceptual Modeling for Configuration, 1998. • Selected Tutorials: • -Smith, Welty, McGuinness. OWL Web Ontology Language Guide, 2003. • Noy, McGuinness. Ontology Development 101: A Guide to Creating your First Ontology. 2001. • Brachman, McGuinness, Resnick, Borgida. How and When to Use a KL-ONE-like System, 1991. • Languages, Environments, Software: • OWL - http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/ , http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-guide/ • DAML+OIL: http://www.daml.org/ • - Inference Web - http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/software/iw/ • - Chimaera - http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/software/chimaera/ • FindUR - http://www.research.att.com/people/~dlm/findur/ • - TAP – http://tap.stanford.edu/ • - DQL - http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/projects/dql/ McGuinness - Mitre

  23. Extras McGuinness - Mitre

  24. <rdfs:Class rdf:ID="BLAND-FISH-COURSE"> • <daml:intersectionOf rdf:parseType="daml:collection"> • <rdfs:Class rdf:about="#MEAL-COURSE"/> • <daml:Restriction> • <daml:onProperty rdf:resource="#FOOD"/> • <daml:toClass rdf:resource="#BLAND-FISH"/> • </daml:Restriction> • </daml:intersectionOf> • <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#DRINK-HAS-DELICATE-FLAVOR-RESTRICTION"/> • </rdfs:Class> • <rdfs:Class rdf:ID="BLAND-FISH"> • <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#FISH"/> • <daml:disjointWith rdf:resource="#NON-BLAND-FISH"/> • </rdfs:Class> • <rdf:Description rdf:ID="FLOUNDER"> • <rdf:type rdf:resource="#BLAND-FISH"/> • </rdf:Description> • <rdfs:Class rdf:ID="CHARDONNAY"> • <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#WHITE-COLOR-RESTRICTION"/> • <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#MEDIUM-OR-FULL-BODY-RESTRICTION"/> • <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="#MODERATE-OR-STRONG-FLAVOR-RESTRICTION"/> […] • </rdfs:Class> • <rdf:Description rdf:ID="BANCROFT-CHARDONNAY"> • <rdf:type rdf:resource="#CHARDONNAY"/> • <REGION rdf:resource="#NAPA"/> • <MAKER rdf:resource="#BANCROFT"/> • <SUGAR rdf:resource="#DRY"/> […] • </rdf:Description> McGuinness - Mitre

  25. DAML/OWL Language • Web Languages • RDF/S • XML • Extends vocabulary of • XML and RDF/S • Rich ontology representation language • Language features chosen for efficient implementations DAML-ONT DAML+OIL OWL OIL Formal Foundations Description Logics Frame Systems FACT, CLASSIC, DLP, … McGuinness - Mitre

  26. Issues • Collaboration among distributed teams • Interconnectivity with many systems/standards • Analysis and diagnosis • Scale • Versioning • Security • Ease of use • Diverse training levels / user support • Presentation style • Lifecycle • Extensibility McGuinness - Mitre

  27. Services Ontologies DAML-S http://www.daml.org/services/ • publication references • ontology specifications • examples A few interesting projects using DAML-S: • MyGrid: (http://mygrid.man.ac.uk) • AgentCities (http://www.agentcities.org) • Services composer (http://www.mindswap.org/~evren/composer/) McGuinness - Mitre

  28. General Nature of Descriptions a WINE a LIQUID a POTABLE grape: chardonnay, ... [>= 1] sugar-content: dry, sweet, off-dry color: red, white, rose price: a PRICE winery: a WINERY grape dictates color (modulo skin) harvest time and sugar are related general categories structured components interconnections between parts McGuinness - Mitre

  29. SUMO • Available in KIF (first order logic), DAML, LOOM and XML • May be used without fee for any purpose (including for profit) • Mapped by hand to 100,000 synsets of WordNet lexicon • Validated with formal theorem proving • 52 publicly released versions created over two years (approximately 1,000 concepts, 4000 assertions, and 750 rules so far) • Specialized with dozens of free domain ontologies • In use by companies, universities and government around the world • Acadmica Sinica – Taiwan, U Arizona, lookwayup.com, NIST etc • Available at http://ontology.teknowledge.com McGuinness - Mitre

  30. Chimaera – A Ontology Environment Tool • An interactive web-based tool aimed at supporting: • Ontology analysis (correctness, completeness, style, …) • Merging of ontological terms from varied sources • Maintaining ontologies over time • Validation of input • Features: multiple I/O languages, loading and merging into multiple namespaces, collaborative distributed environment support, integrated browsing/editing environment, extensible diagnostic rule language • Used in commercial and academic environments; used in HORUS to support counter-terrorism ontology generation • Available as a hosted service from www-ksl-svc.stanford.edu • Information:www.ksl.stanford.edu/software/chimaera McGuinness - Mitre

  31. Layer Cake Foundation McGuinness - Mitre

  32. McGuinness - Mitre

  33. McGuinness - Mitre

  34. Some Pointers • Ontologies Come of Age Paper: http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/papers/ontologies-come-of-age-abstract.html • Ontologies and Online Commerce Paper: http://www.ksl.stanford.edu/people/dlm/papers/ontologies-and-online-commerce-abstract.html • DAML+OIL: http://www.daml.org/ • WEBONT: http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/WebOnt/ • OWL: http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/ McGuinness - Mitre

  35. E-Commerce Search (starting point Forrester Research modified by McGuinness) • Ask Queries - multiple search interfaces (surgical shoppers, advice seekers, window shoppers) - set user expectations (interactive query refinement) - anticipate anomalies • Get Answers - basic information (multiple sorts, filtering, structuring) - modify results (user defined parameters for refining, user profile info, narrow query, broaden query, disambiguate query) - suggest alternatives (suggest other comparable products even from competitor’s sites) • Make Decisions - manipulate results (enable side by side comparison) - dive deeper (provide additional info, multimedia, other views) - take action (buy) McGuinness - Mitre

  36. The Need For KB Analysis • Large-scale knowledge repositories will necessarily contain KBs produced by multiple authors in multiple settings • KBs for applications will typically be built by assembling and extending multiple modular KBs from repositories that may not be consistent • KBs developed by multiple authors will frequently • Express overlapping knowledge in different, possibly contradictory ways • Use differing assumptions and styles • For such KBs to be used as building blocks - They must be reviewed for appropriateness and “correctness” • That is, they must be analyzed McGuinness - Mitre

  37. Our KB Analysis Task • Review KBs that: • Were developed using differing standards • May be syntactically but not semantically validated • May use differing modeling representations • Produce KB logs (in interactive environments) • Identify provable problems • Suggest possible problems in style and/or modeling • Are extensible by being user programmable McGuinness - Mitre

More Related