1. ‫أكاديمية الحكومة اإللكترونية الفلسطينية‬
The Palestinian eGovernment Academy
www.egovacademy.ps
Tutorial 4: Ontology Engineering & Lexical Semantics
Session 8.1
Ontology Modeling Challenges
Dr. Mustafa Jarrar
University of Birzeit
mjarrar@birzeit.edu
www.jarrar.info
PalGov © 2011 1

2. About
This tutorial is part of the PalGov project, funded by the TEMPUS IV program of the
Commission of the European Communities, grant agreement 511159-TEMPUS-1-
2010-1-PS-TEMPUS-JPHES. The project website: www.egovacademy.ps
Project Consortium:
Birzeit University, Palestine
University of Trento, Italy
(Coordinator )
Palestine Polytechnic University, Palestine Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium
Palestine Technical University, Palestine
Université de Savoie, France
Ministry of Telecom and IT, Palestine
University of Namur, Belgium
Ministry of Interior, Palestine
TrueTrust, UK
Ministry of Local Government, Palestine
Coordinator:
Dr. Mustafa Jarrar
Birzeit University, P.O.Box 14- Birzeit, Palestine
Telfax:+972 2 2982935 mjarrar@birzeit.eduPalGov © 2011
2

3. © Copyright Notes
Everyone is encouraged to use this material, or part of it, but should
properly cite the project (logo and website), and the author of that part.
No part of this tutorial may be reproduced or modified in any form or by
any means, without prior written permission from the project, who have
the full copyrights on the material.
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike
CC-BY-NC-SA
This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-
commercially, as long as they credit you and license their new creations
under the identical terms.
PalGov © 2011 3

4. Tutorial Map
Topic Time
Session 1_1: The Need for Sharing Semantics 1.5
Session 1_2: What is an ontology 1.5
Intended Learning Objectives
A: Knowledge and Understanding Session 2: Lab- Build a Population Ontology 3
4a1: Demonstrate knowledge of what is an ontology, Session 3: Lab- Build a BankCustomer Ontology 3
how it is built, and what it is used for.
Session 4: Lab- Build a BankCustomer Ontology 3
4a2: Demonstrate knowledge of ontology engineering
and evaluation. Session 5: Lab- Ontology Tools 3
4a3: Describe the difference between an ontology and a Session 6_1: Ontology Engineering Challenges 1.5
schema, and an ontology and a dictionary.
Session 6_2: Ontology Double Articulation 1.5
4a4: Explain the concept of language ontologies, lexical
semantics and multilingualism. Session 7: Lab - Build a Legal-Person Ontology 3
B: Intellectual Skills Session 8_1: Ontology Modeling Challenges 1.5
4b1: Develop quality ontologies.
Session 8_2: Stepwise Methodologies 1.5
4b2: Tackle ontology engineering challenges.
4b3: Develop multilingual ontologies. Session 9: Lab - Build a Legal-Person Ontology 3
4b4: Formulate quality glosses. Session 10: Zinnar – The Palestinian eGovernment 3
C: Professional and Practical Skills Interoperability Framework
4c1: Use ontology tools. Session 11: Lab- Using Zinnar in web services 3
4c2: (Re)use existing Language ontologies.
Session 12_1: Lexical Semantics and Multilingually 1.5
D: General and Transferable Skills
d1: Working with team. Session 12_2: WordNets 1.5
d2: Presenting and defending ideas. Session 13: ArabicOntology 3
d3: Use of creativity and innovation in problem solving.
Session 14: Lab-Using Linguistic Ontologies 3
d4: Develop communication skills and logical reasoning
abilities. Session 15: Lab-Using Linguistic Ontologies 3
PalGov © 2011 4

5. Outline and Session ILOs
This session will help student to:
4a2: Demonstrate knowledge of ontology engineering and
evaluation.
4b1: Develop quality ontologies.
4b2: Tackle ontology engineering challenges.
PalGov © 2011 5

6. Reading
Guarino, Nicola and Chris Welty. 2002. Evaluating Ontological Decisions with
OntoClean. Communications of the ACM. 45(2):61-65. New York: ACM Press.
http://www.loa.istc.cnr.it/Papers/CACM2002.pdf
PalGov © 2011 6

7. Ontology Modeling
• Building ontologies is still arcane art form.
• One maybe a good ontology engineer, but he does not know why!
• An ontology might be better than another, but it is difficult to know
why!
• We need a methodology to guide us not only on what kinds of
ontological decisions we should make, but on how these
decisions can be evaluated.
 OntoClean provides a set of modeling ―guidelines‖ in this
direction, but it is still not meant to be a comprehensive
methodology for the all ontology modeling phases.
PalGov © 2011 7

8. OnToClean
A methodology for ontology-driven conceptual analysis, developed
by:
Nicola Guarino
CNR Institute for Cognitive Sciences and Technologies,
Laboratory for Applied Ontology (LOA) in Trento, Italy
Chris Welty
Research Scientist at the IBM T.J. Watson Research Center in
New York.
PalGov © 2011 8

9. Modeling mistakes
• Many people misuse the subsumption relation, what they do is not
subsumptions.
• Which are correct/wrong here?
Person
Time Duration Educational Institute
Student worker
University
Time Interval
Person Birzeit University
Role
Student worker Female Male Faculty of Law
PalGov © 2011 9

10. Modeling mistakes
• Many people misuse the subsumption relation, what they do is not
subsumptions.
• Which are correct/wrong here?
Person
Educational Institute
 How to know that your Time Duration
modeling choices are right?
Student worker
 What makes your ontology better than my ontology?
University
Time Interval
Person Birzeit University
Role
Student worker Female Male Faculty of Law
PalGov © 2011 10

11. Subsumption (The Subtype Relation)
• The subsumption (also called is-a relationship) forms a hierarchy
– A subsumes B if all instances of B are necessarily instances of A
– Attributes of a supertype are inherited by it subtypes along the hierarchy.
• The subsumption relation is often misused
– People are typically confuses the subtype relation with the part-of and
instance-of relations, and types with roles.
PalGov © 2011 11

12. Subsumption misused with Instantiation
Mammal Species Mammal Species
XIs A
Is A SubtypeOf
InstanceOf
Human Human
Is A
X InstanceOf
Mustafa Mustafa
 Instances are sometimes confused with types!
 To distinguish between them you should ask what are the instances of
―Mustafa‖? Instances of ―Human‖? Instance of Species? Etc.
 How to distinguish between same/different instances of a type, two things
are same entity (identity criteria)?
PalGov © 2011 12

13. Subsumption misused with Part/Whole
Car Car
SubtypeOf X PartOf
Engine Engine
It is often difficult for beginners in ontological analysis to distinguish between the part-of and the
subclass relation. This is due to the fact that subclass is analogous to subset, and a subset of a
set is a part of it. This confusion can be overcomed when we realize the difference between the
parts of a set and the parts of its members
 Among the essential properties of a car there are some functional properties, like being able
to accommodate people. An engine has also certain functional properties as essential
properties, like being able to crank and generate a rotational force. Since, however, the
essential properties of cars do not apply to engines, one cannot subsume the other. The
proper relationship here is part and subsumption is not part. [GW02].
PalGov © 2011 13

14. Subsumption misused with Disjunction
Car Part Engine or Wheel or Seat
SubtypeOf X SubtypeOf But this is still not an
intuitive class
Engine Better Car Part
To see how this is incorrect, rigidity analysis can be most useful. No instance of a car part is
necessarily a car part (we could take an engine from a car and put it in a boat, making it no
longer a car part but a boat part), so we have to make that class anti-rigid. The class engine
itself is rigid, however, since we can’t imagine an entity that is an engine becoming a non-
engine. Being an engine is essential to it. An anti-rigid class, such as car part, can not
subsume a rigid one, and so we have a conflict.
This type of mistake is particularly common in object-oriented, where value restrictions are an
important part of modeling. These anti-rigid classes are created to satisfy a modeling need to
represent disjunction, for instance, ―any car part is either an engine, or a wheel, or a seat, …‖
It should be clear that this is different from saying ―all engines are car parts,‖ since, in fact,
they are not. Of course, most modeling systems do not provide for disjunction, so modelers
believe they are justified using these tricks, but if the intention is to make meaning as clear as
possible then subsumption is not disjunction. [GW02]
PalGov © 2011 14

15. Subsumption misused with Constitution
 An instance of Water is Ocean
Water
an amount of water
SubtypeOf
X
PartOf
Ocean  An instance of Ocean is the
Water
“the Atlantic Ocean,”
 Oceans are made up of
amounts of water
PalGov © 2011 15

16. Subsumption misused with Polysemy
• A term may have multiple meanings (Polysemy),
• For example ―Table‖ means:
 A piece of furniture having a smooth flat top that is usually supported by
one or more vertical legs.
 A set of data arranged in rows and columns
Furniture Array PoliticalEntity GeographicArea
SubtypeOf
? SubtypeOf SubtypeOf
? SubtypeOf
Table Country
 A polysemous class might be placed below both meanings
PalGov © 2011 16

17. OntoClean
OntoClean helps you to:
• evaluate misuses of subsumption and inconsistent modeling choices.
• provides a formal basis for why they’re wrong.
• Focuses on taxonomy
A subsumes B iff for all x, x instance of B implies x instance of A
PalGov © 2011 17

18. OntoClean
based on [Bechhofer]
• Considers general properties
– being an apple
– being a table
– being a person
– being red
• A Class is then the set of entities that exhibit a property in a possible
world.
• Members of the Class are instances of the property.
• The terminology can be slightly confusing
– These are not properties in the sense of OWL properties.
PalGov © 2011 18

19. OntoClean
based on [Bechhofer]
• Metaproperties describe particular characteristics of the properties.
• Essence
• Rigidity
• Identity
• Unity
• Associating metaproperties with properties (i.e. classes) helps
characterize aspects of the properties.
• Constraints on the metaproperties enforce restrictions on the
taxonomy and help to highlight and evaluate the choices made.
PalGov © 2011 19

20. Essence (‫)الجوهر‬
• A property (i.e. class) is essential to an entity if it must hold for it.
– Not just things that accidently happen to be true all the time.
‫تكون الصفة جوهرية لكينونة ما إذا كان إجبارية‬
.‫تكون الصفة غير جوهرية لكينونة ما إذا كانت عرضية، لوقت معين وليس طوال الوقت‬
PalGov © 2011 20

21. Rigidity )‫(صفة اللزوم‬
• A rigid property is a property that is essential to all of its instances.
‫تكون الصفة الزمة إذا كانت جوهرية لجميع حامليها، مثل صفة إنسان ألن من يحمل هذه الصفة ال‬
.‫يمكنه التخلي عنها في أي وقت أو ظرف‬
– Every entity that can exhibit the property must do so.
– Every entity that is a person must be a person
– There are no entities that can be a person but aren’t.
• An anti-rigid property is one that is never essential
‫تكون الصفة غير الزمة إذا لم تكن جوهرية لجميع حامليها، مثل صفة طالب ألن من يحمل هذه الصفة‬
.‫يمكنه التخلي عنها‬
– For example every instance of student isn’t necessarily a student -
students may cease to be students at some point without ceasing to exist
or changing their identity.
• A semi-rigid property is one that is essential to some instances but not
to others
‫تكون الصفة شبه الزمة إذا كانت جوهرية لبعض حامليها، مثل صفة قاسي فهي جوهرية للبعض مثل‬
.‫―مطرقة‖ وغير جوهرية للبعض اآلخر مثل ―اإلسفنج‖ القاسي‬
PalGov © 2011 21

22. Rigidity )‫(صفة اللزوم‬
• A rigid property is a property that is essential to all of its instances.
‫تكون الصفة الزمة إذا كانت جوهرية لجميع حمليها، مثل صفة إنسان ألن من يحمل هذه الصفة ال‬
.‫يمكنه التخلي عنها في أي وقت أو ظرف‬
– Every entity that can exhibit the property must do so.
– Every entity that is a person must be a person
 Each concept in the Ontology should be
– There are no entities that can be a person but aren’t.
labeled with Rigid (+R) , Anti-rigid (-R), or
• An anti-rigid Semi-rigid (~R). is never essential
property is one that
‫تكون الصفة غير الزمة إذا لم تكن جوهرية لجميع حمليها، مثل صفة طالب ألن من يحمل هذه الصفة‬
 As we will see‫يمكنه التخلي عنها‬
. later, these metaproperties impose
– For example every instance of student isn’t necessarilywhich can be
constraints on the subsumption relation, a student -
students may used toto be students at someconsistency ofceasing to exist
cease check the ontological point without taxonomic
or changing their identity.
links.
• A semi-rigid propertyof thesethat is essential to some instances but not
 One is one constraints is that anti-rigid properties
to others cannot subsume rigid properties. Thus Student cannot
‫صفة قاسي فهي جوهرية للبعض مثل‬Person. ‫تكون الصفة شبه الزمة إذا كانت جوهرية لبعض‬
subsume ‫حمليها، مثل‬
.‫―مطرقة‖ وغير جوهرية للبعض اآلخر مثل ―اإلسفنج‖ القاسي‬
PalGov © 2011 22

23. Identity
• Identity criteria allows us to recognize individual entities in the world.
– Is that a dog?
 Necessary and sufficient criteria in terms of definitions
– Is that my dog?
• Time Duration
– One hour, two hours etc.
• Time Interval
– 11:00-12:00 on Tuesday 26th, 17:00-18:45 on Saturday 17th
Time Duration Time Interval
SubtypeOf X Component Of
Time Duration
Time Interval
When we say “all time intervals are time durations” we really mean “all time intervals have a
time duration”;
PalGov © 2011 23

24. Identity
 Identity refers to the problem of being able to recognize individual
entities in the world as being the same (or different).
 Identity criteria are conditions used to determine equality (sufficient
conditions) and that are entailed by equality (necessary conditions).
 For example, how do we recognize a person we know as the same
person even though they may have changed?
 Thinking about concepts’ identities, while building an ontology help us
avoid/discover mistakes.
 For example:
Time Duration
Instances like: “One hour”, “two hours”, “one day” etc.
SubtypeOf
Time Interval Instances like: “1:00–2:00 next Tuesday”,“2:00–3:00 next Wednesday”, etc.
 since all Time Intervals are also Time Durations.
PalGov © 2011 24

25. Identity
According to the identity critera for time durations, two durations of the same
length are the same duration. In other words, all one hour time durations are
identical—they are the same duration and therefore there is only one ―one
hour‖ time duration.
According to the identity criteria for time intervals, two intervals occurring at the
same time are the same, but two intervals occurring at different times, even if
they are the same length, are different. Therefore, the two example intervals
given would be different intervals, but the same duration.
This creates a contradiction: if all instances of time interval are also instances
of time duration (as implied by the subclass relationship), how can they be two
instances under one class and a single instance under another?
Time Duration
Instances like: “One hour”, “two hours”, “one day” etc.
SubtypeOf
Time Interval Instances like: “1:00–2:00 next Tuesday”,“2:00–3:00 next Wednesday”, etc.
 since all Time Intervals are also Time Durations.
PalGov © 2011 25

26. Identity
When we say ―all time intervals are time durations‖ we really mean ―all time
intervals have a time duration‖; the duration is a component of an interval, but
it is not the interval itself. Therefore, we cannot model the relationship as
subclass.
Time Duration Time Interval
SubtypeOf
X Component Of
Time Interval Time Duration
X
 since all Time Intervals are also Time Durations.
PalGov © 2011 26

27. Identity
When we say ―all time intervals are time durations‖ we really mean ―all time
intervals have a time duration‖; the duration is a component of an interval, but
it is not the interval itself. Therefore, we cannot model the relationship as
subclass.
A property will inherit identity criteria from parents
A property may also supply its own additional identity criteria
Time Duration Time Interval
SubtypeOf
X Component Of
Time Interval Time Duration
X
 since all Time Intervals are also Time Durations.
PalGov © 2011 27

28. Unity
 Unity refers to the problem of describing the way the parts of an
object are bound together.
 Unity criteria identify whether or not a property is intended to
describe whole objects.
 For some classes, all their instances are wholes (like Car), for
others none of their instances are wholes (like Oil).
• A property carries unity if all its instances exhibit a common unity
criterion (e.g., Ocean)
• A property carries no unity if its instances are all wholes, but with
different unity criteria (Legal Entity, as it includes companies and people
• A property carries anti-unity if all of its instances are not necessarily
whole
PalGov © 2011 28

29. Unity
 Thinking about concepts’ identities, while building an ontology helps
us avoid/discover mistakes. For example:
Instance is an amount of water, but it is not a whole, since it is
Water not recognizable as an isolated entity.
SubtypeOf
Instances like the “Atlantic Ocean”, is recognizable as a
Ocean single entity
If we claim that instances of the latter are not wholes, and instances of the
former always are, then we have a contradiction. Problems like this
again stem from the ambiguity of natural language, oceans are not ―kinds
of ―water‖, they are composed of water.
PalGov © 2011 29

30. Unity
 Thinking about concepts’ identities, while building an ontology helps
us avoid/discover mistakes. For example:
Water Water
X
SubtypeOf Composed Of
Ocean Ocean
If we claim that instances of the latter are not wholes, and instances of the
former always are, then we have a contradiction. Problems like this
again stem from the ambiguity of natural language, oceans are not ―kinds
of ―water‖, they are composed of water.
PalGov © 2011 30

31. OntoClean’s support!
• Recognizing identity and unity criteria is typically very difficult, and
needs philosophical/analytical skill.
• Well, of course good ontologies are not easy and need deep thinking!
• These difficulties are not simplified much by OntoClean, but there is
no better methodology!
• More examples and practice help you become a good ontology
modeler! …..  then your salary will be very high! ;-)
PalGov © 2011 31

32. How to apply OntoClean?
based on [Bechhofer]
SubtypeOf
Given two classes A and B, where B subsumes A, A
the following rules must hold:
B ?
Rules
1. If B is anti-rigid, then A must be anti-rigid
2. If B carries an identity criterion, then A must carry the same criterion
3. If B carries a unity criterion, then A must carry the same criterion
4. If B has anti-unity, then A must also have anti-unity
5. If B is externally dependent, then A must be
• Analysis of a hierarchy using these rules can help identify problematic
modeling choices.
• Conceptual backbone of rigid properties
PalGov © 2011 32

33. Summary
based on [Bechhofer]
• OntoClean helps a modeler to justify and analyze the choices made in
defining a subsumption hierarchy.
• Metaproperties :
– Rigidity
– Identity
– Unity
– Dependent
• Application of constraints on metaproperties
– Highlights potential inconsistencies in the modelling
PalGov © 2011 33

34. References
Guarino, Nicola and Chris Welty. 2002. Evaluating Ontological Decisions with
OntoClean. Communications of the ACM. 45(2):61-65. New York: ACM Press.
Sean Bechhofer: OntoClean. COMP30412. University of Manchester
http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~seanb/teaching/COMP30412/OntoClean.pdf
PalGov © 2011 34