Figure 1 - uploaded by Peter Haase
Content may be subject to copyright.
1: How a metamodel and a UML profile for ontologies fit into the picture of the Meta Object Facility framework

1: How a metamodel and a UML profile for ontologies fit into the picture of the Meta Object Facility framework

Source publication
Article
Full-text available
Abstract In this paper we present integrated MOF compliant metamodels and UML proflles for OWL DL, the Semantic Web Rule Language (SWRL) and Ontology Mappings. Based on these metamodels and proflles, UML tools can be used for visual modeling of rule-extended ontologies and ontology mappings. Contents

Contexts in source publication

Context 1
... methodology, tools and technology, however, seem to be a feasible approach for supporting the development and maintenance of ontologies, rules and ontology mappings. The general idea of using MOF-based metamodels and UML profiles for this purpose is depicted in Figure 1.1 : A metamodel for rule-extended ontologies and ontology mappings as well as a UML profile are grounded in MOF, in that they are defined in terms of the MOF meta- metamodel, explained further in this section. The UML profile mechanism is an extension mechanism to tailor UML to specific application areas. ...
Context 2
... goal is to provide a framework that sup- ports any kind of metadata and that allows new kinds to be added as required. MOF plays a crucial role in the four-layer metadata architecture of the Object Management Group (OMG) shown in Figure 1.2. The bottom layer of this architecture encompasses the raw information to be described. ...
Context 3
... bottom layer of this architecture encompasses the raw information to be described. For example, Figure 1.2 contains information about a wine called ElyseZinfandel and about the Napa region, where this wine grows. ...
Context 4
... general idea of using MOF-based metamodels and UML profiles for the purpose of engineering ontologies is depicted in Figure 1.1 for the OWL ODM: The ODM as well as a UML profile are grounded in MOF, in that they are defined in terms of the MOF meta-metamodel, explained further in this section. The UML profile mechanism is an extension mechanism to tailor UML to specific application areas. ...
Context 5
... the OWL ODM is just one part of the networked ontology model. Additional modules extend the OWL ODM with specific features of networked ontologies, as shown in Figure 1.3. While the OWL ODM has a direct grounding in the OWL ontology language, the extensions have a generic character in that they are formalism independent and allow a grounding in different formalisms . ...
Context 6
... the other aspects of networked ontologies (mappings, versioning, ... ) no such standards exist yet. In favor of general applicability we therefore provide generic metamodels for these extensions that allow trans- lations to different formalisms, as shown in Figure 1.3 . ...
Context 7
... EnumeratedClass is connected to the enumerated individuals by dependencies (cf. Figure 2.14). The reader may note that UML associations can only be used between classes, an EnumeratedClass can therefore not be consistently represented with associations, if the UML no- tation for objects is used for individuals. ...
Context 8
... EnumeratedDatatype is depicted similar to the enumeration of individuals, viz. a stereotyped UML class is connected to the enumerated data values through dependencies and we provide a text-based shorthand notation (cf. Figure 2.19). ...

Similar publications

Article
Full-text available
The Software Radio Domain Special Interest Group (SWRadio DSIG) of the Object Management Group (OMG) is currently defining the specification of a new generation of radio, called Software Radio. Following the OMG MDA approach, the SWRadio DSIG defines its specification in the form of UML Platform Independent Model (PIM). This paper defines a systema...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
This paper presents a brief overview of the translation techniques between the OMG’s UML modeling language and ontological engineering languages such as the W3C’s adopted standard language for Semantic Web, the Web Ontology Language (OWL). The main objective of this paper is to analyze the feasibility and easiness of modeling an ontology by using c...
Article
Full-text available
In this paper we show a process for deflning a translation between two difierent modeling languages that allows to map a model expressed in a modeling language into a model expressed in the other modeling language. This mapping construction process is tackled from a metamodeling perspective and it is applied to fragments of OML and UML modeling lan...
Article
Full-text available
Ambiguous metric definitions lead to incomparable imple- mentation variants in tools. In this paper, we propose an unambiguous description framework for software metrics, which includes an exten- sible meta-model and language mapping definitions. We start from the Dagstuhl Middle Metamodel (DMM), an existing and well-defined meta- model for reverse...

Citations

... Prerequisite for performing meta-model based model transformations is to represent meta-models and models as direct and indirect instances of the ecore meta-meta-model. There are multiple MOF-based meta-models which are already represented conforming to ecore, such as OWL 2, 15 XSD, 16 UML 2, 17 and BPMN 2. 18 Additionally, [63] provides MOF-based meta-models for OWL ontologies [64,65,69,70], OWL ontology mappings [68], SWRL [66,67,154], and F-Logic [177,178] which integrates logic with object-oriented programming. Ecore represetations of meta-models and models are physically represented by the standard exchange format XML Metadata Interchange (XMI) [249]. ...
Thesis
Full-text available
The formulation of constraints and the validation of RDF data against these constraints is a common requirement and a much sought-after feature, particularly as this is taken for granted in the XML world. Recently, RDF validation as a research field gained speed due to shared needs of data practitioners from a variety of domains. For constraint formulation and RDF data validation, several languages exist or are currently developed. Yet, there is no clear favorite and none of the languages is able to meet all requirements raised by data professionals. Therefore, further research on RDF validation and the development of constraint languages is needed. There are different types of research data and related metadata. Because of the lack of suitable RDF vocabularies, however, just a few of them can be expressed in RDF. Three missing vocabularies have been developed to represent all types of research data and its metadata in RDF and to validate RDF data according to constraints extractable from these vocabularies. Data providers of many domains still represent their data in XML, but expect to increase the quality of their data by using common RDF validation tools. We propose a general approach to directly validate XML against semantically rich OWL axioms when using them in terms of constraints and extracting them from XML Schemas adequately representing particular domains, without having any manual effort defining constraints. We have published a set of constraint types that are required by diverse stakeholders for data applications and which form the basis of this thesis. Each constraint type, from which concrete constraints are instantiated to be checked on the data, corresponds to one of the requirements derived from case studies and use cases provided by various data institutions. We use these constraint types to gain a better understanding of the expressiveness of solutions, investigate the role that reasoning plays in practical data validation, and give directions for the further development of constraint languages. We introduce a validation framework that enables to consistently execute RDF-based constraint languages on RDF data and to formulate constraints of any type in a way that mappings from high-level constraint languages to an intermediate generic representation can be created straight-forwardly. The framework reduces the representation of constraints to the absolute minimum, is based on formal logics, and consists of a very simple conceptual model with a small lightweight vocabulary. We demonstrate that using another layer on top of SPARQL ensures consistency regarding validation results and enables constraint transformations for each constraint type across RDF-based constraint languages. We evaluate the usability of constraint types for assessing RDF data quality by collecting and classifying constraints on common vocabularies and validating 15,694 data sets (4.26 billion triples) of research data according to these constraints. Based on the large-scale evaluation, we formulate several findings to direct the future development of constraint languages.
... The method mainly operates over conceptual representations of the two repositories: intuitively, entities correspond to ontology classes and DB tables, while relationships correspond to ontology properties and attributes in DB tables. Our method assumes that the conceptual models are to be defined in a formalism suitable for representing relevant properties of both sides: we assumed to use graphical models defined following the notations presented in [7,11]. Note that in the case of the RDB, defining such schema roughly corresponds to the extraction of its relational schema. ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Ontologies are a well-affirmed way of representing complex structured information and they provide a sound conceptual foundation to Semantic Web technologies. On the other hand, a huge amount of information available on the web is stored in legacy relational databases. The issues raised by the collaboration between such worlds are well known and addressed by consolidated mapping languages. Nevertheless, to the best of our knowledge, a best practice for such cooperation is missing: in this work we thus present a method to guide the definition of cooperations between ontology-based and relational databases systems. Our method, mainly based on ideas from knowledge reuse and re-engineering, is aimed at the separation of data between database and ontology instances and at the definition of suitable mappings in both directions, taking advantage of the representation possibilities offered by both models. We present the steps of our method along with guidelines for their application. Finally, we propose an example of its deployment in the context of a large repository of bio-medical images we developed.
... A graphical representation of the conceptual structure of the domain ontology. We do not put a constraint on the graphical language used to develop this phase, as long as it is enough usable and expressive to develop the ontology conceptual model: in our examples we have adopted an UML metamodel inspired to the one of [2]. ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
We propose a general methodology to build up a domain ontology from one or more domain glossaries. The particular feature of this methodology is in the parallel construction of a domain ontology and a complete domain terminology. In this paper we fully describe the methodology phases and we apply them to a real-world example from the medical domain. Nowadays, ontologies have become a relevant representation formalism and many application domains are considering their adoption. This attention claims for methods for reusing domain knowledge resources in the development of domain ontologies. Accordingly, in this paper we discuss a general methodology to create a domain ontology from one or more domain glossaries. Before explaining the actual steps of the methodology, let us introduce some of the ideas that led to its composition. Basically, the methodology is to be manually carried out by the ontology developers with the help from domain experts. Some steps of the methodology cannot be easily automatized because an explicit interpretation of the semantics of terms is required as, e.g., in the initial phase of clustering. In analogy to other proposals for the translation of thesauri (9,20), the translation is filtered by the interpretation of the domain experts. Hence, the proposed methodology provides a way for defining a domain ontology from a domain glossary and not a simple translation. A particular feature of our methodology is that, while building the domain ontology, one also reconstructs a complete terminology for the domain of interest. However, these two representations are distinct: the terminology should not necessarily be complete with respect to entities external to the domain (or to entities that are not essential or specific for the examined domain), while the ontology should even represent concepts without a specific name in the terminology and be complete with respect to the represented domain. Another feature of our methodology is that it allows one to build up a complete domain ontology (i.e., without undefined objects) starting from a possibly incomplete glossary: this is obtained by a sort of saturation on the glossary. We restrict our attention to input glossaries with unstructured terms, as opposed to what is assumed, for example, in thesauri (9,16,20). We define a
... In particular, we propose a Meta Object Facility-based metamodel for describing mappings between OWL DL ontologies as well as a UML profile that defines a graphical format for mapping modeling. As a starting point, we use previous work on a meta-modeling approach for OWL DL [2]. ...
... In the context of this work, we decided to focus on mappings between ontologies represented in OWL DL. This restriction makes it much easier to deal with this aspect of ontology mappings as we can refer to the corresponding metamodel for OWL DL specified in [2]. In particular, the metamodel contains the class OntologyElement, that represents an arbitrary part of an ontology specification. ...
... The metamodel is, just like OWL DL itself, a lot more extensive. However, for lack of space, we refer to [2] for a full specification. Additionally, the metamodel is augmented with constraints, expressed in the Object Constraint Language ([17]), specifying invariants that have to be fulfilled by all models that instantiate the metamodel. ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Recently, the advantages of metamodeling as a foundation for the graphical speciflcation of ontologies have been recognized by the semantic web community. This has lead to a number of activities con- cerned with the development of graphical modeling approaches for the Web Ontology Language based on the Meta Object Facility (MOF) and the Unifled Modeling Language (UML). An aspect that has not been addressed by these approaches so far is the need to specify mappings be- tween heterogenous ontologies. With an increasing number of ontologies being available, the problem of specifying mappings is becoming more important and the rationales for providing model based graphical mod- eling support for mappings is the same as for the ontologies themselves. In this paper, we propose a MOF-based metamodel for mappings be- tween OWL DL ontologies as well as a UML based graphical language for modeling mappings independent of a speciflc mapping formalism.
... In Section 4 we present the specification of the networked ontology model, namely the metamodel of OWL DL, which serves as the core of the model, the rules metamodel, which provides support for defining rules on top of ontologies, and the mapping metamodel, which describes how ontologies in a network of ontologies are related via ontology mappings. For a full reference to the complete specification, we refer the reader to [3]. We conclude the paper in Section 5. ...
... Extensions to UML2 consist of custom UML stereotypes , which usually carry the name of the corresponding language element, and dependencies. For a complete reference of the formal correspondence between the metamodels and the languages, the relationship between the UML profiles and the metamodels, and the OCL constraints for the metamodels, we refer the reader to [3]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Next generation semantic applications will be characterized by a large number of networked ontologies; as a consequence the com-plexity of semantic applications increases. In this paper we present a metamodel and a UML syntax for the specification of networked ontolo-gies. For the specification of the metamodel, we follow the metamodeling approach of Model Driven Architecures.
Chapter
With the goal of speeding up the ontology development process, ontology developers are reusing as much as possible available ontological and non-ontological resources such as classification schemes, thesauri, lexicons, and folksonomies, that have already reached some consensus. The reuse of such non-ontological resources necessarily involves their re-engineering into ontologies. Based on this new trend, this chapter presents a general method for re-engineering non-ontological resources into ontologies, taking into account that non-ontological resources are highly heterogeneous in their data model and contents. The method is based on the so-called re-engineering patterns, which define a procedure that transforms the non-ontological resource components into ontology representational primitives. This chapter also presents the description of a software library that implements the transformations suggested by the patterns. Finally, the chapter depicts an evaluation of the method.
Chapter
The compositional approach where several existing ontologies are connected to form a large modular ontology relies on the representation of mappings between elements in the different participating ontologies. A number of languages have been proposed for this purpose that extend existing logical languages for ontologies in a non-standard way. In this chapter, we compare different proposals for such extensions on a formal level and show that these approaches exhibit fundamental differences with respect to the assumptions underlying their semantics. In order to support application developers to select the right mapping language for a given situation, we propose a mapping metamodel that allows us to encode the formal differences on the conceptual level and facilitates the selection of an appropriate formalism on the basis of a formalism-independent specification of semantic relations between different ontologies by means of a graphical modelling language.
Conference Paper
Powerful and cheap computing devices are flooding the world, which arises the primary challenge for pervasive computing: how to represent devices and their functions without distracting user attention. Most existing pervasive computing platforms use traditional components and services as the answer. However, both of them have limitations. Existing services in the form of Interface are small in granularity, lacking of semantics and distracting to invoke remotely. Existing components are lacking of a unified model for representing dependencies and a mechanism for dealing with these dependencies, especially the runtime dependency. In this paper, we extend the service and component in meta-level for pervasive computing. Firstly, we extend them in meta-model, making the service as the aggregation of Interface. Secondly, we entitle semantics to services by applying ontology and provide a new service invoking mechanism. Thirdly, we wrap Component by the enhanced service to decouple the compile-time and runtime dependencies; and introduce a novel group interaction mechanism for multi-service interaction. Finally, a prototype platform which applies enhanced service and component is presented; and two demos are used to show how the extended service and component work and benefit.
Conference Paper
Service description is the base of service discovery in pervasive computing environment. It should be able to describe functional and non-functional information of services and inherent relationship between services, and provide abundant data types and powerful service matching, and apply to ubiquitous devices. Existing service description methods fail to fulfill all the needs. This paper presents a method called TSO (type-based service ontology) in order to find a solution to those problems. TSO combines ontology and type system to represent service ontology by the elements of type system. With ontology representing service semantic, all the information and inherent relationship can be described, and the semantic and reasoning matching can be provided. With type system representing ontology, the extra and complex ontology languages, which overburden resource-constraint devices, are removed, and abundant data types in type system are available. In this paper two challenges are discussed: expressing ontologies in type system and matching services in TSO.