...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of the Association for Information Systems >Learning The Differences Between Ontologies and Conceptual Schemas Through Ontology-Driven Information Systems.
【24h】

Learning The Differences Between Ontologies and Conceptual Schemas Through Ontology-Driven Information Systems.

机译：通过本体驱动的信息系统学习本体和概念图式之间的差异。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

In the traditional systems modeling approach, the modeler is required to capture a user's view of some domain in a formal conceptual schema. The designer's conceptualization may or may not match with the user's conceptualization. One of the reasons for these conflicts is the lack of an initial agreement among users and modelers concerning the concepts belonging to the domain. Such an agreement could be facilitated by means of an ontology. If the ontology is previously constructed and formalized so that it can be shared by the modeler and the user in the development process, such conflicts would be less likely to happen. Following up on that, a number of investigators have suggested that those working on information systems should make use of commonly held, formally defined ontologies that would constrain and direct the design, development, and use of information systems - thus avoiding the above mentioned difficulties. Whether ontologies represent a significant advance from the more traditional conceptual schemas has been challenged by some researchers. We review and summarize some major themes of this complex discussion. While recognizing the commonalities and historical continuities between conceptual schemas and ontologies, we think that there is an important emerging distinction that should not be obscured and should guide future developments. In particular, we propose that the notions of conceptual schemas and ontologies be distinguished so as to play essentially different roles for the developers and users of information systems. We first suggest that ontologies and conceptual schemas belong to two different epistemic levels. They have different objects and are created with different objectives. Our proposal is that ontologies should deal with general assumptions concerning the explanatory invariants of a domain - those that provide a framework enabling understanding and explanation of data across all domains inviting explanation and understanding. Conceptual schemas, on the other hand, should address the relation between such general explanatory categories and the facts that exemplify them in a particular domain (e.g., the contents of the database). In contrast to ontologies, conceptual schemas would involve specification of the meaning of the explanatory categories for a particular domain as well as the consequent dimensions of possible variation among the relevant data of a given domain. Accordingly, the conceptual schema makes possible both the intelligibility and the measurement of those facts of a particular domain. The proposed distinction between ontologies and conceptual schemas makes possible a natural decomposition of information systems
机译：在传统的系统建模方法中，需要建模者在正式的概念模式中捕获用户对某个领域的看法。设计者的概念化可能与用户的概念化相匹配，也可能不匹配。这些冲突的原因之一是用户和建模者之间缺乏关于该领域概念的初步协议。这样的协议可以通过本体来促进。如果本体是预先构造和形式化的，以便建模人员和用户可以在开发过程中共享它，那么这种冲突就不太可能发生。紧随其后的是，许多研究人员建议从事信息系统工作的人员应使用通常持有的，形式正式定义的本体，这些本体将约束并指导信息系统的设计，开发和使用-从而避免上述困难。一些研究者质疑本体论是否代表了从更传统的概念图式中取得的重大进步。我们回顾并总结了这个复杂讨论的一些主要主题。在认识到概念图式和本体之间的共性和历史连续性时，我们认为存在着一个重要的新兴区别，不应被遮盖并应指导未来的发展。特别是，我们建议区分概念图式和本体的概念，以便为信息系统的开发人员和用户扮演本质上不同的角色。我们首先建议本体论和概念图式属于两个不同的认知层次。它们具有不同的对象，并且具有不同的目标。我们的建议是，本体应处理有关某个域的解释不变性的一般假设-那些假设提供了一个框架，该框架使得能够理解和解释所有域中的数据，从而引起了解释和理解。另一方面，概念模式应解决这些一般解释类别与在特定领域中举例说明它们的事实之间的关系（例如，数据库的内容）。与本体相反，概念图式将涉及对特定领域的解释性类别的含义的规范，以及给定领域相关数据之间可能发生的变化的相应维度。因此，概念图式使得对特定域的那些事实的可理解性和度量成为可能。本体论和概念图之间的拟议区别使信息系统自然分解成为可能

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号