提出五类认知性问题模型,提升本体开发中问题的清晰度与有效性。
Discerning and Characterising Types of Competency Questions for Ontologies
- 按功能将认知性问题分为五类:定位、验证、基础、关系、元属性。
- 构建包含438个标注问题的ROCQS数据集,验证各类问题的差异性。
- 适用于本体设计、评审及教学场景,助力精准提问。
认知性问题(CQs)在本体开发中被广泛用于指导范围界定和验证阶段,但现有方法对如何制定优质问题缺乏明确指引,导致问题模糊或不可用。本文通过分析问题类型、用途及本体开发任务,提出了首个认知性问题模型,包含五类不同目的的问题:定位型(SCQ)、验证型(VCQ)、基础型(FCQ)、关系型(RCQ)和元属性型(MpCQ),每类具有可识别的构成要素。该模型提升了问题的清晰度,旨在增强其在本体开发中的有效性。研究通过用户故事进行实例说明与评估,展示了各类问题在不同开发任务中的适用场景。为促进应用与研究,本文创建了包含438个标注问题的《本体认知性问题库》(ROCQS),整合已有数据集与新增问题及模板,进一步验证了各类问题间的区分性。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Competency Questions (CQs) are widely used in ontology development by guiding, among others, the scoping and validation stages. However, very limited guidance exists for formulating CQs and assessing whether they are good CQs, leading to issues such as ambiguity and unusable formulations. To solve this, one requires insight into the nature of CQs for ontologies and their constituent parts, as well as which ones are not. We aim to contribute to such theoretical foundations in this paper, which is informed by analysing questions, their uses, and the myriad of ontology development tasks. This resulted in a first Model for Competency Questions, which comprises five main types of CQs, each with a different purpose: Scoping (SCQ), Validating (VCQ), Foundational (FCQ), Relationship (RCQ), and Metaproperty (MpCQ) questions. This model enhances the clarity of CQs and therewith aims to improve on the effectiveness of CQs in ontology development, thanks to their respective identifiable distinct constituent elements. We illustrate and evaluate them with a user story and demonstrate where which type can be used in ontology development tasks. To foster use and research, we created an annotated repository of 438 CQs, the Repository of Ontology Competency QuestionS (ROCQS), incorporating an existing CQ dataset and new CQs and CQ templates, which further demonstrate distinctions among types of CQs.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。