1. 1 Adam Pease Articulate Software apease at articulatesoftware dot com http://www.ontologyportal.org/ http://home.earthlink.net/~adampease/professional/ v 1.00 Formal Ontology for NIEM

2. 2 Imagine...your view of the web CV name education workprivate Joe Smith BS Case Western Reserve, 1982 MS UC Davis, 1984 1985-1990 ACME Software, programmer Married, 2 children Slide with thanks to Frank von Harmelan

3. 3...and the Computer's View (assuming you don’t read Chinese) name CV education workprivate

4. 4 But wait, we've got XML -

5. 5 But wait, we've got XML - But the computer sees just meaningless symbols - It doesn't know what “job” means.

6. 6 But wait, we've got Taxonomies - Person Mammal JoeSmith

7. 7 But wait, we've got Taxonomies - o4839 x931 i3729

8. 8 Wait, we've got semantics - Person Mammal JoeSmith instance subclass implies Mammal JoeSmith instance

9. 9 Wait, we've got semantics - Person Mammal JoeSmith instance subclass implies Mammal JoeSmith instance u8475 x9834 p3489 r53 r22 implies x9834 p3489 r53 Computer doesn't understand what “Person” means, but it can appear to, if it makes the same inference as a human

10. 10 Semantics Helps a Machine Appear Smart A “smart” machine should be able to make the same inferences we do (let's not debate the philosophy about whether it would actually be smart) The more sophisticated the logical language, the more inferences that are possible

11. 11 Suggested Upper Merged Ontology 1000 terms, 4000 axioms, 750 rules Mapped by hand to 100,000 English word senses of WordNet 1.6 then ported to 2.1 Also related to dozens of non-English languages, including Arabic Associated domain ontologies totalling 20,000 terms and 70,000 axioms Free SUMO is owned by IEEE but basically public domain Domain ontologies are released under GNU www.ontologyportal.org

12. 12 Formal Ontology Pilot Added hundreds of new terms to SUMO, covering NIEM concepts –Sophisticated formal representation with logical rules –Content now included in MILO.kif and Justice.kif

13. 13 Example NIEM Problem Misuse of subclassOf relation –Requirement subClassOf Technology –If asked to generate a list of known technologies (known instances of the class Technologies), an OWL-compliant reasoner would produce a motley list containing individual requirements, air flow models, and barrier systems, with no obvious connection between them –OWL lacks a “partOf” relation, so subClassOf is often misused

14. 14 Basic Issues with OWL restriction to only binary relations ("B" is between "A" and "C" is a prototypical problematic example) absence of functional terms –(GovernmentFn UnitedStates) instead of having to create GovernmentOfUnitedStates, GovernmentOfSweden etc. absence of a facility for negating statements (i.e. "Adam is not a blond Swede.") These are just the most obvious issues...