Navigation
A virtual “Werkstatt” for digitization in the sciences- ABECTO: An ABox Evaluation and Comparison Tool for Ontologies
- Combining Image and Caption Analysis for Classifying Charts in Biodiversity Texts
- CoMerger: A Customizable Online Tool for Building a Consistent Quality-Assured Merged Ontology
- How good is this merged ontology?
- Machine Learning Pipelines: Provenance, Reproducibility and FAIR Data Principles
- Matching Biodiversity and Ecology Ontologies: Challenges & Evaluation Results
- Participatory Visualization Design as an Approach to Minimize the Gap between Research and Application
- ReproduceMeGit: A Visualization Tool for Analyzing Reproducibility of Jupyter Notebooks
- Tag Me If You Can! Semantic Annotation of Biodiversity Metadata with the QEMP Corpus and the BiodivTagger
- Toward OWL Restriction Reconciliation in Merging Knowledge
- Towards a Core Ontology for Hierarchies of Hypotheses in Invasion Biology
- Towards Transforming Tabular Datasets into Knowledge Graphs
How good is this merged ontology?
| Title: | How good is this merged ontology? |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Samira Babalou, Elena Grygorova, and Birgitta König-Ries. |
| Source: | In 17th Extended Semantic Web Conference (ESWC'20), Poster and Demo Track. |
| Date: | 2020-06-01 |
| Type: | Poster |
| Abstract: |
With the growing popularity of semantics-aware integration solutions, various ontology merging approaches have been proposed. Determining the success of these developments heavily depends on suitable evaluation criteria. However, no comprehensive set of evaluation criteria on the merged ontology exists so far. We develop criteria to evaluate the merged ontology. These criteria cover structure, function and usability of the merged ontology by evaluating General Merge Requirements (GMR)s, analyzing the intended use and semantics, and considering the ontology and entity annotation, respectively. We demonstrate the applicability of our criteria by providing empirical tests. |