ontology-summit
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontology-summit] {quality-methodology} Ontology Summit Track A: Met

To: Ontology Summit 2013 discussion <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: ASTRID DUQUE RAMOS <astrid.duque@xxxxx>
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2013 16:45:59 +0100
Message-id: <20130307164559.99435oinlvsclqnr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

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
  i. http://ws.acs.org.au/jrpit/JRPITVolumes/JRPIT43/JRPIT43.2.159.pdf
  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  
http://ws.acs.org.au/jrpit/JRPITVolumes/JRPIT43/JRPIT43.2.159.pdf    (05)

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)

Regards,    (08)

Astrid    (09)


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
> practice?
>
> Thanks,
> Megan Katsumi
>    (011)



_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/   
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>