Research Papers

Ontological Conceptualization Based on the SKOS

[+] Author and Article Information
Farhad Ameri

Department of Engineering Technology,
Texas State University,
San Marcos, TX 78666
e-mail: ameri@txstate.edu

Boonserm Kulvatunyou

Systems Integration Division,
National Institute of Standards and Technology,
e-mail: serm@nist.gov

Nenad Ivezic

Systems Integration Division,
National Institute of Standards and Technology,
e-mail: nenad.ivezic@nist.gov

Khosrow Kaikhah

Department of Computer Science,
Texas State University,
San Marcos, TX 78666
e-mail: khosrow@txstate.edu

It should be noted that semantic relationships include lexical relationships as well. Equivalency, hierarchy, and associativity are the main types of semantic relationships that are often used in ontologies.

Domain experts in the context of current work refer to the individual who has in-depth knowledge of various manufacturing processes and their associated equipment.

Recall here refers to the number of concepts in the expert list that are indexed automatically as well.

In this work, PPT corpus was not the same as the reference text. PPT corpus, in its default setting, is a generic text without any manufacturing significance. CRR measure can be improved if a manufacturing-related PPT corpus is available.

1Corresponding author.

2The capability of two or more networks, systems, devices, applications, or components to interwork, and to exchange and readily use information, securely, effectively, and with little or no inconvenience to the user (Definition form Smart Grid 2.0).

Contributed by the Computers and Information Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF COMPUTING AND INFORMATION SCIENCE IN ENGINEERING. Manuscript received July 24, 2013; final manuscript received April 28, 2014; published online May 20, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Xiaoping Qian.

J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng 14(3), 031006 (May 20, 2014) (11 pages) Paper No: JCISE-13-1138; doi: 10.1115/1.4027582 History: Received July 24, 2013; Revised April 28, 2014

Ontological conceptualization refers to the process of creating an abstract view of the domain of interest through a set of interconnected concepts. In this paper, a thesaurus-based methodology is proposed for systematic ontological conceptualization in the manufacturing domain. The methodology has three main phases, namely, thesaurus development, thesaurus evaluation, and thesaurus conversion and it uses simple knowledge organization system (SKOS) as the thesaurus representation formalism. The concept-based nature of a SKOS thesaurus makes it suitable for identifying important concepts in the domain. To that end, novel thesaurus evaluation and thesaurus conversion metrics that exploit this characteristic are presented. The ontology conceptualization methodology is demonstrated through the development of a manufacturing thesaurus, referred to as ManuTerms. The concepts in ManuTerms can be converted into ontological classes. The whole conceptualization process is the stepping stone to developing more axiomatic ontologies. Although the proposed methodology is developed in the context of manufacturing ontology development, the underlying methods, tools, and metrics can be applied to development of any domain ontology. The developed thesaurus can serve as a standalone lightweight ontology and its concepts can be reused by other ontologies or thesauri.

Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Li, Z., and Ramani, K., 2007, “Ontology-Based Design Information Extraction and Retrieval,” Artif. Intell. Eng. Des., Anal. Manuf., 21(2), pp. 137–154. [CrossRef]
Seung-Cheol, Y., Patil, L., and Dutta, D., 2010, “Function Semantic Representation (FSR): A Rule-Based Ontology for Product Functions,” ASME J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng., 10(3), p. 031001. [CrossRef]
Yan, Y., Dong, Y., Zhibin, J., and Lixin, T., 2008, “Ontology-Based Semantic Models for Supply Chain Management,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 37(11–12), pp. 1250–1260. [CrossRef]
Martinez Lastra, J. L., and Delamer, I. M., 2008, “Ontologies for Production Automation,” Advances in Web Semantics I, Heidelberg, Germany, 4891 LNCS, pp. 276–289.
Pinto, H. S., and Martins, J. P., 2004, “Ontologies: How Can They Be Built?,” Knowl. Inf. Syst., 6(4), pp. 441–464. [CrossRef]
Neuhaus, F., and Vizedom, A., 2013, “Ontology Summit 2013 Communiqué:Towards Ontology Evaluation Across the Life Cycle,” Gaithersburg, MD.
Gruber, T. R., 1993, “A Translation Approach to Portable Ontology Specification,” Knowl. Acquisition, 5(2), pp. 199–220. [CrossRef]
Grüninger, M., and Fox, M. S., 1995, “Methodology for the Design and Evaluation of Ontologies,” Proceedings of Workshop on Basic Ontological Issues in Knowledge Sharing, Montreal, Canada.
Ahmed, S., Sanghee, K., and Wallace, K. M., 2007, “A Methodology for Creating Ontologies for Engineering Design,” Trans. ASME J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng., 7(2), pp. 132–140. [CrossRef]
De Nicola, A., Missikoff, M., and Navigli, R., 2009, “A Software Engineering Approach to Ontology Building,” Inf. Syst., 34(2), pp. 258–275. [CrossRef]
W3c—World Wide Web Consortium, 2009, SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System Reference, http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference/
Ameri, F., and Dutta, D., 2006, “An Upper Ontology for Manufacturing Service Description,” ASME Conf. Proc., 2006(42578), pp. 651–661.
Uschold, M., and King, M., 1995, “Towards a Methodology for Building Ontologies,” Proceedings of Workshop on Basic Ontological Issues in Knowledge Sharing—IJCAI, Montreal, Canada.
Fernández López, M., Gómez Pérez, A., and Juristo, N., 1997, “Methontology: From Ontological Art Towards Ontological Engineering,” Proceedings of Symposium on Ontological Engineering of AAAI, Stanford University, California, pp. 33–40.
Li, Z., Raskin, V., and Ramani, K., 2007, “A Methodology of Engineering Ontology Development for Information Retrieval,” Proceedings of International Conference on Engineering Design, Paris, France, DS 42.
Staab, S., Studer, R., Schnurr, H. P., and Sure, Y., 2001, “Knowledge Processes and Ontologies,” IEEE Intell. Syst., 16(1), pp. 26–34. [CrossRef]
Pinto, H. S., Staab, S., and Tempich, C., 2004, “DILIGENT: Towards a Fine-Grained Methodology for Distributed, Loosely-Controlled and Evolving Engineering of Ontologies,” ECAI 2004: 16th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Proceedings.
Gomez-Perez, A., and Suarez-Figueroa, M. C., 2009, “Scenarios for Building Ontology Networks Within the Neon Methodology,” Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Knowledge Capture, Redondo Beach, CA, pp. 183–184.
2005, “Guidelines for the Construction,Format, and Management of Monolingual Controlled Vocabularies " Technical Report No. ANSI/NISO Z39.19-2005, ANSI American National Standards Institute, New York, NY.
1986, “Guidelines for the Establishment and Development of Monolingual Thesauri,” Technical Report No. ISO 2788:1986 International Organization for Standardization Geneve.
Kolte, S. G., and Bhirud, S. G., 2009, “Wordnet: A Knowledge Source for Word Sense Disambiguation,” Int. J. Recent Trends Eng., 2(4), pp. 213–217.
Sparck Jones, K., and Needham, R. M., 1968, “Automatic Term Classifications and Retrieval (Cambridge Language Research Unit, England),” Inf. Storage Retr., 4(2), pp. 91–100. [CrossRef]
1969, “FAA Thesaurus of Technical Descriptors,” Federal Aviation Administration, Department of Transportation.
Pastor-Sanchez, J. A., Mendez, F. J. M., and Rodriguez-Munoz, J. V., 2009, “Advantages of Thesaurus Representation Using the Simple Knowledge Organization System (SKOS) Compared With Proposed Alternatives,” Inf. Res., 14(4), p. 19.
2011, Agricultural Thesaurus and Glossary Home Page, http://agclass.nal.usda.gov/
2011, “Medical Subject Heading.”
National Cancer Institute (NCI) Thesaurus, http://ncit.nci.nih.gov/
2011, “Gemet Thesaurus—Eionet.”
Yang, M. C., Wood, W. H., Iii, and Cutkosky, M. R., 2005, “Design Information Retrieval: A Thesauri-Based Approach for Reuse of Informal Design Information,” Eng. Comput., 21(2), pp. 177–192. [CrossRef]
Todd, R. H., Allen, D. K., and Alting, L., 1994, Manufacturing Processes Reference Guide, Industrial Press, Inc., New York.
Shin, J., Kulvatunyou, B. S., Lee, Y., and Ivezic, N., 2013, “Concept Analysis to Enrich Manufacturing Service Capability Models,” Atlanta, GA.
Ameri, F., and Patil, L., 2010, “Digital Manufacturing Market: A Semantic Web-Based Framework for Agile Supply Chain Deployment,” J. Intell. Manuf., 23(5), pp. 1817–1832.


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Narrower and broader concepts for Ceramic Mold Casting

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Ontological conceptualization process

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Tagged terms in the original text in a PPT's tagging event

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Tagged terms in the term cloud in a PPT's tagging event

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

The concept diagram for ManuTerms:Plaster Mold Casting

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

CC score is calculated based on the number of external and internal links for each concept

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

The process of introducing ManuTerms concept to MSDL based on their connectivity and frequency score




Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In