Hi Megan and All, (01)
The quality model of the OQuaRE framework is composed of a set of
characteristics and these in turn are composed of sub-characteristics.
This Quality model can be associated with the quality requirements.
The sub-characteristics are measured through of its associated
metrics. Then, answering your questions: (02)
1. how do you intend for these metrics to be employed to aid in the
development of an ontology?
a. OQuaRE is not only a set of metrics, but is a complete framework
that include quality criteria (characteristics and
subcharacteristics). I suppose you are asking about the traceability
between requirements and metrics so, in OQuaRE, the metrics are
associated with the sub-characteristics and these are aligned with
ontology requirements, it is not specified as such in OQuaRE but could
be inferred, For example, if an ontology requirement is ?The ontology
should be reusable?, then the OQuaRE subcharacteristics and metrics
associated with reusability should be taken into account. (03)
2. Do you have any use cases that demonstrate the application of your
metrics in the development of an ontology?
a. We have evaluated some ontologies as a product, in the final step
of the life cycle, as a result we obtained the scores for
sub-characteristics . You can find the results of this research in
ii. http://miuras.inf.um.es/evaluation/oquare/CaseStudies.html (04)
3.How were specific metrics selected?
a. Some of the currently metrics in OQuaRE were selected from the
state of the art of ontology quality and the other ones were taken
from software quality metrics and adapted to ontologies. References
can be found in
4. How the metrics results were used to inform the development process?
a. The metrics results have been mapped to a scale 1-5 and
associated to quality sub-characteristic and this in turn are
associated to requirements, that are not yet specifically defined in
OQuaRE, but that would be defined based on the quality
sub-characteristics. In this way, these metrics would have a
traceability to the ontology requirements and this is the way to
inform the development process. (06)
5. If you have such use cases, In your opinion could they be
generalized to contribute to a methodology that would provide guidance
for the use of these metrics in practice.
a. We hope OQuaRE can become a framework that provides guidance on
how to use and apply the metrics to ontologies and obtain as a result
the list of
strengths and weaknesses in terms of sub- characteristics
(Availability, modularity, formal relation support, cohesion, etc) (07)
Megan Katsumi <katsumi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> escribió: (010)
> Hi All,
> My apologies for the delay but I would like to follow up on some of the
> discussion on this topic.
> The survey that Amanda mentioned sounds like a really great idea. I
> understand that this effort has already been revived and I look forward to
> the results.
> Samir and Astrid - I think my original question is particularly relevant to
> you as both of your presentations focused on metrics for ontology (quality)
> evaluation. My question was not when is a metric relevant for ontology
> quality, but *how* do you intend for these metrics to be employed to aid in
> the development of an ontology? Specifically, I am wondering if you have
> any use cases that demonstrate the application of your metrics in the
> development of an ontology. How were specific metrics selected, and how
> their results were used to inform the development process? If you have
> such use cases, In your opinion could they be generalized to contribute to
> a methodology that would provide guidance for the use of these metrics in
> Megan Katsumi
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2013/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2013
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ (012)